[Asrg] Round 2 of the DNSBL BCP

[Frank Ellermann]

Chris Lewis wrote:
 
>> It may or may not be their right to express that opinion --
>> I think it is, but I'm not an attorney even in *this*
>> country.  I think it's overbroad to state a global legal
>> opinion.
 
> Perhaps it should be toned down, but I think it still 
> needs to be said somehow.  You don't have to be a lawyer
> to express an opinion about the law.

The problem is not the opinion expressed in the list.  The
problem is to write "their absolute right" in a BCP when
you are no lawyer.  Some bad ideas published as list could
be illegal where I live.

> The document uses "DNSBL" thruout to handle DNS-query-based
> lists, and explicitly calls out both domains/IPs, and is
> inclusive of SURBLs too. I think adding RHSBL/SURBL/URIBL
> etc will only make the document way more opaque than it
> needs to be and is unnecessary.

Using 127.0.0.2 as always listed test entry is unfortunately
no common practice in RHSBLs I know.  It's also not obvious
that this should be no technical problem.  SURBL is no pure
RHSBL, it covers also IPs.  RFCI is a pure RHSBL today, it
doesn't list 127.0.0.2.  If you think that's not the "b" in
"best" you have to say that RHSBLs have no technical reason
to use say example.tld instead of 127.0.0.2.  I didn't check
if the draft already does this. 

> Youse guys are altogether too afraid of lawyers.  I think 
> downplayed/informal legal suggestions are useful.

If you have checked it with lawyers worldwide go for it.
If not avoid it like hell in an IETF BCP.  

> Such a policy may be an effective measure to prevent
> small issues blowing up into big problems.

Much better.

> The 0/0 phenomena is the media football, it's one of the
> things that can make responsible DNSBL users stay awake
> at night.  Something needs to be said here.

+1  Whatever you say, there's no real exit strategy to ever
get out of obscure tools or Web pages related to querying
long dead lists.  Even if the authors update the tools and
Web pages users of old versions or old links will not stop
doing whatever they are doing, hopefully not blocking mail.

 Frank