John Leslie wrote:
Chris Lewis <clewis(_at_)nortel(_dot_)com> wrote:
... This is why I, Matt Sergeant, and others have been working on
a DNSBL policy BCP what could be considered a companion document:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-irtf-asrg-bcp-blacklists-04.txt
I hope to make a few final grammatical changes to the above document in
the next few days and move it on towards last call.
First, a meta-comment:
I hope we don't try to make a class of documents called IRTF BCPs.
The intent behind this, I hope, is to work on it in IRTF's ASRG, then
submit it to the IESG as an Individual Sumbission.
It's been through at least four iterations on the ASRG, so it already
has been worked on there. Extensively.
At this point, I want to make the latest revisions (with John L's and my
"assigned document handler" or whatever that's called) and have
discussions on that.
The current BCP draft went through review at the last IETF, and from
what I've heard from John Levine, received general acceptance with no
significant objection. I have to review the comments and see if they
need to be encorporated. My brief glance suggested at most a minor
wording change. But there's a couple emails full of minor grammatical
tweakage that I have to go through first too. I promised John I'll have
r5 up Monday, but I might be a day or two late.
I _think_ the "irtf" in the name is a historical accident on my part (I
hadn't done this before) and no more - it being much more trouble than
it's worth to change a document draft file name and screw up draft
numbering. All that will be fixed by the approval/publication process.
John can speak to the IRTF vs. ASRG vs. IETF BCP issue.
This is reasonably clearly stated. Whether there is any sort of IETF
consensus about the existence of "proper" use seems to be in question.
The thrust of the document is around asserting that the only legitimate
judge of "proper use" is the _user_ of the DNSBL, and establishing a
framework of principles and guidelines by which the user can make
informed choices. The fact that someone else might think there's no
legitimate use has no bearing - it's not their mail server - they have
no say in email acceptance policy.
The BCP is pitched at a level to obviate most issues about, er,
currency. It's a distillation of the principles people want to
know/should know about/look for in DNSBLs they might think of using,
captured over as long as there's been DNSBLs. The document was first
started in 2003 (eeek) and has roots much longer ago than that. I don't
think it'll obsolete much more quickly than DNSBLs themselves do.
DNSBLs won't be going away anytime soon.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf