Eric Rescorla wrote:
Speaking as someone who just got burned by exactly such a list,
I think I need to agree with John: I don't object to the IETF
publishing an informational document on this, but a PS implies
that IETF endorses the practice, which I don't think we should do.
Eric,
Roughly 95% of all mail is spam. That makes email a pretty onerous "practice".
So we ought to remove standards status for all email specifications.
Or we could consider keeping mechanism and policy separate, standardizing
technologies (mechanisms) and refraining from condemning them because some
operators have misguided policies and use the mechanisms badly.
Really, guys, everything we standardize has examples of misuse. So that hardly
makes your current line of argument substantive.
Are you actually saying that there is something inherently inappropriate in
having published reputation lists and that a technical standards body like the
IETF is tasked with rejecting standardization of otherwise-acceptable technical
specifications because we don't like how some people will use them?
Are you seriously lobbying for the IETF to be an idealistic island that ignores
rough consensus and very well-established practice among the broader Internet
community?
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf