On 14/02/07, Matt Sergeant <msergeant(_at_)messagelabs(_dot_)com> wrote:
On 14-Feb-07, at 5:30 PM, Douglas Otis wrote:
> On Feb 14, 2007, at 12:13 PM, Peter Bowyer wrote:
>
>> On 14/02/07, Douglas Otis <dotis(_at_)mail-abuse(_dot_)org> wrote:
>>>
>>> No where within this entire draft is the role of the network
>>> provider mentioned or properly considered. This represents a
>>> _major_ shortcoming in a draft purporting to provide advice to
>>> DNSBL operators!
>>
>> That's presumably because the draft addresses the operational
>> processes of a DNSBL, not its policies. Your points are advice on
>> policy - which, however sensible, are not within the scope of the
>> draft as currently written.
>
> A delisting interval is strictly related to DNSBL policy. The
> draft is not describing how to delist, but specifically when. This
> is about policy. Nothing but policy.
Lets be more specific then: Your posts are all about listing
criteria. This draft does not (and never will with me as an author)
mandate listing criteria. That way lies madness.
Absolutely. Diversity of policy amongst DNSBLs is good. Mandating
process in order to make a given DNSBL's policy transparent and
demonstrably adhered to is good. Mandating the policy is bad.
Peter
--
Peter Bowyer
Email: peter(_at_)bowyer(_dot_)org
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg