I think this may have been already put to bed, but I haven't seen a post
like this so far..
BCP = Best Current Practices
UCEPROTECT are the only larger (umm 'known') DNSBl with a pay model.
Other well known (and arguably larger in usage - SORBS userbase is way
over (multiply by way over) the 2.5m that Claus has presented for
UCEPROTECT) DNSBls are:
CBL (mostly through Spamhaus)
Spamcop
Spamhaus
SORBS
None of which charge, and there is a general consensus on this list that
charging is wrong (I have said it for years, since 2003 when I
implemented the charity donation I said it was wrong. I said that
collecting the money yourself for yourself is a VERY wrong practice.
Chris (and others) should remember i said, "I don't like it, in fact I
hate it, but I can't see an effective alternative") Therefore would it
not follow that the list which includes a lot of DNSBl operators
(representitives from all the large ones and lots of smaller ones)
suggesting that the Best Current Practice of not charging is actually
the Best Current Practice...?
That said I can see why there is the argument with "MUST NOT" vs "SHOULD
NOT" because I argued some years ago (version 5?) that it should be
"SHOULD NOT" because there are those (here even) that will point at any
DNSBl and the clause where that DNSBl fails to meet the BCP and use it
as a reason for stopping using the DNSBl at a management level in a
company rather than clearing up listings and stopping spam. That
practice IMHO is against the purpose of the BCP which is a guide to how
one should operate (rather than give so called rules/law/policy on how
it should be run.)
Does that make sense?
Regards,
Michelle
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg