[Asrg] Final(?) draft of DNSwL draft
Jim Fenton
fenton at cisco.com
Mon Jul 30 01:35:04 EDT 2007
Based on a very quick read:
Reference [3] should probably point to something at Trend; the page at
mail-abuse.com looks like a temporary redirect.
Section 2.1 refers to the address values used "may have other values as
described below" but, aside from some discussion of how values may be
logically ORed, I didn't find this. If there isn't a consistent set of
meanings, please say so.
Section 2 should also have some discussion of the operational problems
associated with DNSxLs, such as the problem that one has if one is
received an allocation for a "tainted" IP address. There is no
consistent means of getting off all the DNSBLs that people use. You
might also mention how many DNSBLs there are.
Section 3 should mention the need for some sort of email authentication
in order for the domain name to be meaningful.
-Jim
John L wrote:
> I got some review comments back from the IRTF on the DNSwL draft, so
> I've done another version:
>
> http://asrg.sp.am/draft-irtf-asrg-dnsbl-03.txt
>
> Please take a look, if nobody hates it I'll send it off on Monday.
>
> Regards,
> John Levine, johnl at iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for
> Dummies",
> Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://www.johnlevine.com, ex-Mayor
> "More Wiener schnitzel, please", said Tom, revealingly.
>
> PS: The comments said:
>
>> I have done a review of this document. I think it could use a bit
>> more attention in section 2.3. This section mentions an
>> "organization" may use a variety of DNSxLs for different purposes.
>> I believe this statement can be expanded and made more clear. In
>> particular, the next sentence discusses "multiple sublists", but no
>> definition has yet been given for just what that is, and how it
>> relates to an organization and its variety of DNSxLs. In the next
>> paragraph it mentions subdomains and sublists.
>>
>> I think with another pass on this part {and a definition for the term
>> rDNS
>> in 2.1} and the doc would be ok.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Asrg mailing list
> Asrg at ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg
>
More information about the Asrg
mailing list