Re: [Asrg] New draft draft-irtf-asrg-bcp-blacklists-01.txt

[SM <sm at resistor.net>]

At 22:29 30-03-2008, Douglas Otis wrote:
>This is Dave Rand again, again - I am not part of this mailing list,
>and am responding via this forum simply to provide facts, figures and
>current status.  I continue to be available for questions, comments
>and backing data.

I gather that Dave Rand is not following the discussion as he is not 
part of the mailing list.  It's not conducive to have a discussion 
under these circumstances.

>If you want to put in the draft that "fully or semi-automated lists
>should have a retest interval", that's fine with me.  In fact, this
>would help blocklist providers defend against "you are cracking our
>system!" complaints. Define the retest interval to be something
>reasonable, and I'm certain that all reputation providers doing
>automated listing will help.

This draft is not a license for DNSBL operators to scan hosts or do any tests.

>Automatic expiration for automated lists?  Well, we know that 8 years
>isn't long enough.  I don't know what it should be.  20 years?

The DNSL operator is free to have an expiration of 20 years.  This 
draft is a BCP.  It's up the operator to determine whether they wish 
to follow it or not.

>Perhaps I am mis-reading this, or perhaps I'm just confused about the
>intent of the draft to insulate service providers from any requirement
>of action.  If I am, I apologize to the group.  Again, I am *all for*

If there's any requirement for service providers to act upon, it 
makes adoption of the draft more difficult.

Regards,
-sm 

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg