I'm not requesting for a root.
I'm just highlighting the first post in the thread which is to make clear in
the draft there is no root.
Sorry also I'm catching up on the spec (yes I know I should read the archives).
A few questions:
-DNSBL usualy return an A record where the value ma indicate a status. Should
this draft try to codify some answers? For instance a particular answer would
mean DNSBL is shutdown
-Should a listing in DNSBL generates an email to the listed to inform them of
their new status. As stated in the document (3.4) many mail servers logs are
not well watched, and it may take a while to recognise a listing has been
added.
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Nicol" <davidnicol(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>
To: "Franck Martin" <franck(_at_)avonsys(_dot_)com>, "ASRG"
<asrg(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org>
Sent: Wednesday, 15 October, 2008 11:05:25 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: Re: [Asrg] New Version Notification for draft-irtf-asrg-dnsbl-07
to paraphrase Mr. Levine, establishing a organized hierarchy of DNS*Ls
is not on anyone's radar.
It's an interesting idea, but who or what would be the root? How
would they be organized? Its easy to imagine the process starting by
partnerships between complementary lists, and hard to imagine the
massive infrastructure investment required to establish a semantic
organization of dnslists by fiat.
Imagining a standardization under, for instance, .lists.arpa is
certainly easy to do, and would give a level of legitimacy to those
lists able to achieve that brand. (presumably there would be service
level and governance requirements)
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 12:03 PM, Franck Martin <franck(_at_)avonsys(_dot_)com>
wrote:
Well, my meaning is that these are islands. There is no root.
Or did you mean something else by "does not have any hierarchy?"
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg