I'm with you, for the most part, in the spirit of "MUST NOT" (charge fees)
for delisting/expedited delisting/delisting with extra pepperoni
in order to avoid both impropriety and the appearance of impropriety.
But...should this also mean that a DNSBL "MUST NOT" charge fees *to list*
a domain?
I say "yes".
And let's extend this a bit, generalizing the concept of DNSBL: the
same data could be published as (a) a file (b) a torrent (c) a DNS RPZ
or other formats. I think if we're going to argue that some action
is appropriate/inappropriate when the data's in a DNSBL, we should
argue the same thing for that same action when the same data's repackaged
in a different form. So are we prepared to state that delisting
(OR listing) "MUST NOT" involve a fee in all of those cases?
I'm fine with that, by the way.
---rsk
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg