On 1/18/11 7:46 AM, John Levine wrote:
New and I hope final revision of the DNSBL BCP.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-asrg-bcp-blacklists/
I'd like to publish this as an ASRG document sooner rather than later.
So please take a look at it and say:
a) I agree with what it says, OK for ASRG consensus.
b) I have minor reservations but don't object to publishing it, OK for
ASRG partial consensus.
c) It's so wrong that you shouldn't publish it unless you change X to
Y. (Be sure to fill in X and Y.)
John,
C. This draft continues the delusion of IP address listings for IPv6.
An important feature of IPv6 is the ability to rapidly renumber. Any
scheme that attempts to apply policy against IPv6 addresses removes this
important feature.
Suggestions related to IPv6 address listings are almost certainly
representative of poor advice. For example how might one determine what
would be a "reasonable" rescan period for the v6 address space? What
would be a reasonable listing duration when a different IP address can
be used for centuries for every message ever sent? Frankly, anything
that suggests IP address listing criteria for IPv6 would represent
advice not based upon any practical experience, nor supported by
reasonable justifications. There is nothing that even suggests reactive
block-listings of IPv6 addresses can ever be disseminated at a rate
effective at mitigating abuse.
This draft should caution against assumptions that suggest IPv4
practices can be extended for use with IPv6!
-Doug
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg