On Wednesday, December 07, 2005 at 1:09 PM Frank Ellermann wrote:
If you go for BCP you should really consider two points:
- 127.0.0.1/31 shouldn't be used as "result code", and
normally they're also never listed.
Frank, would you mind elaborating on why you believe 127.0.0.1/31 should
not be used as a result code? I know of a few (a very few) blocklists
that return 127.0.0.1. Yes, I know 127.0.0.1 = localhost, but it was my
understanding that this was the very point of using 127.0.0.1. I
checked the ASRG archives, but I did not find anything relevant to this
issue. I apologize if the answer is painfully obvious.
Further, could you please explain why you think this issue is of
sufficient importance to be included in a BCP on DNSBL management. For
example, can you cite any specific problems caused by blocklists
returning codes of 127.0.0.1. IOW, how does the use of 127.0.0.1/31 as
a return code present a threat, and what is the magnitude and likelihood
of this threat?
Insofar as a BCP in concerned, do you envision this as a SHOULD NOT or a
MUST NOT? Finally, do you see this as a provision that is more
appropriate for the BCP than the RFC which John Levine is preparing.
Thanks for any enlightenment you are able to provide.
Regards,
Nick
--
Nick Nicholas
Knowledge Engineer
Habeas Inc.
650-694-3320
nick(_at_)habeas(_dot_)com
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg