Re: [Asrg] draft-irtf-asrg-bcp-blacklists-00

["Chris Lewis" <clewis at nortelnetworks.com>]

Matt Sergeant wrote:

> On 4 May 2004, at 14:25, Bill Cole wrote:
> > Do you consider technical best practices relevant to this BCP or not?
> I'd like input from Chris on this question as I had not really 
> considered technical best practices.
Technical best practises are best suited for John Levine's DNSBL RFC. 
Most of the things you'd want to be there should be elevated to RFC 
"MUST"s or "SHOULD"s, because that is what DNSBL "client" 
implementations need to program to.

I've always considered our BCP to be a "policy" BCP, not a technical 
one.  An operational guide.

That being said, John Levine and I debated whether "DNSBL shutdown" 
should be documented in his RFC or our BCP.  I _personally_ would have 
preferred it being in the RFC.  However, the "implementations" of 
high-volume DNSBL shutdown we've seen heretofore have all been, um, 
"suboptimal" ;-) [+], and I as yet haven't seen a "reasonable" one yet 
(at least one that I understood.  I know someone who has commented at 
length on "how to do this right", perhaps I can get a detailed explanation.

I talked to Yakov and John about this and they both suggested we leave 
this undefined in this draft rather than expend time trying to invent a 
wholly new procedure.

[+] In some cases I can't say that I blame them...  But it would be nice 
to have a suggested method so that BL operators don't find themselves in 
a bind later.  As one possible example: _don't_ use a BL domain name you 
wouldn't mind deregistering later.

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg