John Levine wrote:
It's only under consideration to the extent that any other
independent submission is, that is, not much.
Apparently 2223bis says that IRTF submissions are also handled
as individual submissions, maybe you should add an "intended
status BCP" somewhere in _your_ draft (?) Or do you want only
"informational" ? For the latter the question of 127.0.0.1/31
would be in fact irrelevant, "informational" isn't important -
if it is not completely wrong almost anything goes.
[back to draft-curch]
Executive summary: DNSBLs do not block 100% of spam and SORBS
has a few false positives, therefore all DNSBLs are bad.
Yes, and this last part "all DNSBLs are bad" is very near to
"completely wrong". A corpus of 1,378 mails as "evidence" and
talking about 3% if that in fact means 6 of 211 is ridiculous.
I've seen more impressing stats published here:
<http://article.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.asrg:10671>
Bye, Frank
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg