IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Last Call: draft-irtf-asrg-dnsbl (DNS Blacklists and Whitelists)

Eric Rescorla <ekr@networkresonance.com> Sat, 08 November 2008 16:30 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietf-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ietf-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 569833A69F7; Sat, 8 Nov 2008 08:30:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDA9F3A6944 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 8 Nov 2008 08:30:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.688
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.688 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.112, BAYES_00=-2.599, SARE_SUB_RAND_LETTRS4=0.799]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tNpUeqLUdiiI for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 8 Nov 2008 08:30:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from romeo.rtfm.com (romeo.rtfm.com [74.95.2.173]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 307403A6882 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 8 Nov 2008 08:30:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from romeo.rtfm.com (localhost.rtfm.com [127.0.0.1]) by romeo.rtfm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8111750822; Sat, 8 Nov 2008 08:46:49 -0800 (PST)
Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2008 08:46:49 -0800
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@networkresonance.com>
To: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
Subject: Re: Last Call: draft-irtf-asrg-dnsbl (DNS Blacklists and Whitelists)
In-Reply-To: <278E245FD800CC334CA5100F@klensin-asus.icannmeeting.org>
References: <20081107111744.GA31018@nic.fr> <20081107141821.79303.qmail@simone.iecc.com> <45AEC6EF95942140888406588E1A660206A5D881@PACDCEXCMB04.cable.comcast.com> <4914D181.9090605@network-heretics.com> <278E245FD800CC334CA5100F@klensin-asus.icannmeeting.org>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.14.0 (Africa) Emacs/21.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka")
Message-Id: <20081108164649.8111750822@romeo.rtfm.com>
Cc: "Livingood, Jason" <Jason_Livingood@cable.comcast.com>, Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>, ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

At Sat, 08 Nov 2008 06:46:54 -0500,
John C Klensin wrote:
> 
> Sadly, I have to agree with Keith.   While these lists are a
> fact of life today, and I would favor an informational document
> or document that simply describes how they work and the issues
> they raise, standardizing them and formally recommending their
> use is not desirable at least without some major changes in our
> email model and standards for what gets addresses onto --and,
> more important, off of-- those lists.

Speaking as someone who just got burned by exactly such a list,
I think I need to agree with John: I don't object to the IETF
publishing an informational document on this, but a PS implies
that IETF endorses the practice, which I don't think we should do.
I appreciate that there is a fine distinction here, but it seems
to me that it's precisely for cases like this where the distinction
is appropriate.

-Ekr
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email