The example still uses 127.0.0.1.
Only as a return value, which is indeed what a fair number of DNSBLs
do. You may not like it, but my goal here is to document what people
do, not to write a BCP which is a separate project.
Are you sure that you want to discuss a commercial service
like [3] in an RfC ?
Of course. There's no rule against discussing commercial stuff and
there never has been.
That deletes reference [3] avoiding potential legal headaches
in a "last call" or IESG review.
Could you explain what legal headaches you're referring to? In the
MAPS section, I'm reporting the history. The mention of the RBL
registered service mark is a fact (an easily verified one at that),
not an IPR claim.
R's,
John
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg