Re: uncooperative DNSBLs, IETF misinformation (was: several messages)

From: Keith Moore <moore at network-heretics.com>
To: Al Iverson <aiverson at spamresource.com>
Cc: ietf at ietf.org
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 15:01:30 -0500
In-reply-to: <e0c581530811141103y1b831a2ag396bd06823db08cf at mail.gmail.com>
References: <e0c581530811140931t23f85aa9w9629a8aa2bc9f26 at mail.gmail.com> <C0F2465B4F386241A58321C884AC7ECC0961B8DB at E03MVZ2-UKDY.domain1.systemhost.net> <e0c581530811141103y1b831a2ag396bd06823db08cf at mail.gmail.com>

Al Iverson wrote:

> Is this unique to DNSBLs? If not, then why does it merit deeper
> consideration in the context of DNSBLs?

what you are arguing is that rather than trying to address the harm done
by DNSBLs, IETF should ignore that harm by ruling it out of scope for
the current discussion.

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

Follow-Ups:
- Re: uncooperative DNSBLs, IETF misinformation (was: several messages)
  - From: Al Iverson

References:
- Re: uncooperative DNSBLs, IETF misinformation (was: several messages)
  - From: Al Iverson
- RE: uncooperative DNSBLs, IETF misinformation (was: several messages)
  - From: michael.dillon
- Re: uncooperative DNSBLs, IETF misinformation (was: several messages)
  - From: Al Iverson

Prev by Date: Re: several messages
Next by Date: Re: several messages
Previous by thread: RE: uncooperative DNSBLs, IETF misinformation (was: several messages)
Next by thread: Re: uncooperative DNSBLs, IETF misinformation (was: several messages)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.

Re: uncooperative DNSBLs, IETF misinformation (was: several messages)

Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.