I don't understand, either. While it lists a /set/ of alternative or
complementary best practices, it /is/ about best practices. Please explain.
On 10/25/2011 7:12 PM, Pete Resnick wrote:
(a) This shouldn't be labeled as a BCP. It's an A/S Standards Track draft if
ever there was one.
(b) Given this and the extension, is it worth spinning up a Greylisting WG?
On 10/23/11 3:40 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
Maybe a new thread Subject: would help here...
Given the interest, I've started putting together a BCP. It's now posted as
draft-kucherawy-greylisting-bcp; comments welcome (and thanks to those of you
that already did). It is only an outline right now, and I'll fill it in as
people make suggestions about topics it should cover and/or start providing
text to include.
It doesn't touch the SMTP extension people are discussing. Someone else can
champion that one if so inclined. That shouldn't go in a BCP because it
doesn't even exist yet. This document will only describe current and historic
Maybe we can get it on the docket for Taipei. I'll send out some friendly pings.