Chris Lewis wrote:
Many DNSBLs are already multi-valued (zen.spamhaus.org presently has
6 independent "flags"), and they can be constructed to be more
sophisticated with as many as 2^24 values on a single return, and/or
being used in scoring.
Thanks for info, I still had "sbl-xbl" instead of "zen" in a script.
I'd really love it if they'd take the same approach as SURBL (or the
former OPM) with sets represented by bits. At the moment they have
apparently eight sets (2, 4,5,6,7,8, 10,11) encoded as integers.
Using bits 1..8 (127.0.0.2 up to 127.0.1.0) they could get a similar
effect, and even indicate if IPs belong to more than one set at the
same time. That's what multi.surbl.org does (with 6 sets), and Jeff
asked implementors to support at least bits 1..15 for 15 sets.
The OPM scheme was also nice, use the 2nd byte for something that's
never zero (e.g. a version number for incompatible definitions of
the remaining two bytes). That also avoids any potential trouble
with a "listed" 127.0.0.1, and supports up to 16 sets (using bit 0
is no problem if the second byte is never zero).
It's simply a matter of deciding on the convention, publishing
it, and having admins configure to the intended interpretation
(or not :-(.
For the "or not" part it would be nice to publish the DNSBL draft
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-irtf-asrg-dnsbl as RFC, but maybe
that project still waits for an update of the IRTF RFC publication
procedure.
http://www.completewhois.com/bogons/bogons_usage.htm
I was going to mention that...
...does it work again ? I've recently removed it because it didn't
pass the "127.0.0.2 listed" test anymore. For similar reasons I've
removed wadb.isipp.com in 2005.
Frank
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg