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

[Matthew Sullivan <matthew at sorbs.net>]

J D Falk wrote:
> Matthew Sullivan apologized:
>
>   
>> Sorry, that's a pre coffee mail - so could have been worded a lot more
>> tactfully, but my point is very clear I think.
>>     
>
> Given that you're one of the handful of current DNSBL operators
> participating in this conversation, do you feel that the document (with
> the changes Chris is working on) is acceptable?
>   

I'm going to read it over the next 2 days (free time permitting and will 
send some comments - as I noted to CL, they are likely to be without 
tact which some regard as rude, this is not the intent just the reality 
of how I review stuff).
> If credentials are necessary, here are some of mine:
>   

Credentials are not required, but as I thought I pointed out current is 
the most important word of BCP, and best a close second.  If a BCP is 
designed that does not follow Best *Current* Practice - regardless of 
whether it is Best or not it is not worth the electrons it is written 
with (paper written on).


Regards,

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