On Tue, 11 Nov 2008, Theodore Tso wrote:
Questions like, "so how does this work in the face of the expanded
IPv6 address space", ideally should be addressed earlier during the
standardization process, and not in last call (where, "oh well, we'll
just block the whole /48 or /32" might have unfortunate side effects
not forseen yet)
That's a matter of listing policy not of protocol. It would be premature
to lay down regulations about what can be put in an IPv6 blacklist, since
we don't have enough operational experience yet. If you try to guess and
the rules turn out not to work in practice, then they will be ignored and
cast doubt on the rest of the document.
This document should concentrate on the mechanisms, which are simple and
uncontroversial, and leave questions of policy aside.
Note that anti-spam blacklists are distributed by more mechanisms than
just the DNS. Questions of listing policy apply whatever protocol is
used, so they shouldn't be addressed in a document that just describes
a DNS-based query protocol.
--- but which don't make sense if the goal is to document existing
practice.
The goal is to document existing practice AND extend it in a straight-
forward way to IPv6 so that implementations are ready BEFORE IPv6 spam
becomes a problem.
Tony.
--
f.anthony.n.finch <dot(_at_)dotat(_dot_)at> http://dotat.at/
VIKING NORTH UTSIRE SOUTH UTSIRE: SOUTHEASTERLY BACKING NORTHWESTERLY 5 TO 7.
ROUGH OR VERY ROUGH DECREASING MODERATE OR ROUGH. RAIN OR SHOWERS. MODERATE OR
GOOD.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf