Re: [Last-Call] Global whitelist was Re: Last Call: BCP 83 PR-Action Against

Bron Gondwana <> Tue, 25 October 2022 19:21 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0CD6C14CF1F for <>; Tue, 25 Oct 2022 12:21:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.104
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.104 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.b=JNAk8NJe; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.b=N5zY1nj0
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pC8c5Nhrft53 for <>; Tue, 25 Oct 2022 12:21:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E455DC14CF00 for <>; Tue, 25 Oct 2022 12:21:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal []) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 136105C00D9 for <>; Tue, 25 Oct 2022 15:21:16 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from imap43 ([]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 25 Oct 2022 15:21:16 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=; h=cc:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1666725676; x= 1666812076; bh=XMt+ituBcIXzpMf0SM02eMxS4k/PcB/5GdDggCz7g+U=; b=J NAk8NJej5qbRgn3HMJ0N+fmYyawJ/Lm7bFqLVRyP/rPbalGeezlTSRqTesOSyTNx HqHEeV9mQJ/YAzRmajQF9FcfjwW9OTAvT8GMQ9mGDk5m7PtOYk1IAXBmk59tdL3x pkv4EKjyEZWIXRiq+v9rHVWtKMepB+JluI2vEZnty/mGzqJId4XmH8tVCQsDA+rG NQ307zpGjtOOk3rnWcnbCkjMjxM+S2bqeq5uiGrLJCou7ScQhrFNGTmvaxDm6fPL xfz3co08pfruRjj/iIGiJZZcADPNxmnWggggPswaPUM3n6iw0xPRvhJHbHiky7SZ 8uIJ4nGjnaXieWWBz0izw==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=; h=cc:content-type:date:date:feedback-id :feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id :mime-version:references:reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to :x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm3; t=1666725676; x=1666812076; bh=XMt+ituBcIXzpMf0SM02eMxS4k/P cB/5GdDggCz7g+U=; b=N5zY1nj0ZfgOlOg+TkF94s3MbqO+4UEKVCN/TWTNzSy7 V6h38183gSAnvYqfcE0eFys7zmC2/VwzQ8Y2+nAm99KSDqXlbzOjFVyVpCEKrYly SE1bzfBe5YtrLJhX8tLtSi7m25ig/QbixN1UIC5cSNIM+SPWv/KbH0LrWTIz6ULf m+WiMX1Dx5fo4RB7e9y6JK5FwiNGXfZ60j8CPdTJZ7fb8hlXNNqtpo2Z/4n+uR1W SqUf+NxHJZGocAhq/SvAxPAHyjb6cVeQTDH/cbGFTIfnntbUqQiMAua8xv/vqKNN vQq+0ao7DI5UBNFTDNwLAjS8/9rmgBe+6HoUkxy3Vw==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:KzdYY4QHhpo9m_ij-tChhy6IEbJ-eNwDIBOgpcsVCt3LcqGUh5M0Iw> <xme:KzdYY1znd-NdcxQ4-759a67zlhlP9gFhTCy2ExrNEBGWhkILRZp2GRUbE1YUwXwzI b5Bv6dU-qU>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvgedrtddtgddutdejucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpefofgggkfgjfhffhffvufgtsegrtd erreerreejnecuhfhrohhmpedfuehrohhnucfiohhnugifrghnrgdfuceosghrohhnghes fhgrshhtmhgrihhlthgvrghmrdgtohhmqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeffvdekfeegle eiueettddtffehveevffefkeduvddttdekiefgjeduvdfhvdduleenucffohhmrghinhep ihgvthhfrdhorhhgnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilh hfrhhomhepsghrohhnghesfhgrshhtmhgrihhlthgvrghmrdgtohhm
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:KzdYY12CGpy_-hIxkMCHtPDZ8HbplD5nLonVq_l7oqDulcS_BIAHbg> <xmx:KzdYY8B7CGG4nqckP4MlgYI0dCDtEsvuPmxuIA1YwXYExtnTbaT_jg> <xmx:KzdYYxj1DsFEncWwyYZcPlbaszkAn_r68hcV0_hjqYDaFNK66-JnQQ> <xmx:LDdYY8teVshV9BspUxv10yMyhBMpkkcNVwkdDaEn2ipYmZKdIx7EbA>
Feedback-ID: i2d7042ce:Fastmail
Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id CACD72D40410; Tue, 25 Oct 2022 15:21:15 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: Webmail Interface
User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.7.0-alpha0-1087-g968661d8e1-fm-20221021.001-g968661d8
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2022 15:20:51 -0400
From: Bron Gondwana <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="47f9c573a88143b68c97f0927c0562ee"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Last-Call] Global whitelist was Re: Last Call: BCP 83 PR-Action Against
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Last Calls <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2022 19:21:21 -0000


This thread is closed. Stop posting about this off-topic item.

The fact that a list is named "whitelist" has been noted, and I'm sure it will be dealt with in an appropriate venue, but that's not here, and it isn't relevant to any topic currently under last call.

Back on the original topic, please continue address the direct issue - with responses to the IESG - if you have new things to say in response to their last call about the proposed BCP 83 action.

I you have any comments about this moderator action, please address them directly to me (feel free to CC Jared as the other moderator) in a private email so they don't continue to create public debate.  I will address them in private first with you,* and in public if you ask me to*, but this way your email won't sit for others to reply to (and the thread to explode with multiple back and forths) while I'm asleep or busy.



On Tue, Oct 25, 2022, at 13:07, Paul Wouters wrote:
> On Oct 25, 2022, at 12:05, Timothy Mcsweeney <> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> >> On 10/25/2022 9:34 AM EDT Paul Wouters <> wrote:
> >> 
> >> 
> >>> On Tue, 25 Oct 2022, Lloyd W wrote:
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>> interesting that the terminology furore of the past few years and the subsequent NIST recommendations (here:
> >>> suggesting use of allowlist/denylist) have not reached far into the IETF.
> >> 
> >> It is a mistake that we will correct.
> >> 
> > 
> > 
> > Since it's a list we are all on, I would like to suggest an alternative name.  How about Master-list?
> I consider this email inappropriate and unprofessional. It was a follow up to another one of your emails that as similarly inappropriate and unprofessional.
> Additionally, you keep misusing the last-call list for off-topic messages.
> I ask that the moderators evaluate these messages.
> Paul
> -- 
> last-call mailing list

  Bron Gondwana, CEO, Fastmail Pty Ltd