Subject: [Asrg] BCP and payments.

From: Michelle Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 09:28:43 +0100

I think this may have been already put to bed, but I haven't seen a post 
like this so far..

BCP = Best Current Practices

UCEPROTECT are the only larger (umm 'known') DNSBl with a pay model.

Other well known (and arguably larger in usage - SORBS userbase is way 
over (multiply by way over) the 2.5m that Claus has presented for 
UCEPROTECT) DNSBls are:

CBL (mostly through Spamhaus)
Spamcop
Spamhaus
SORBS

None of which charge, and there is a general consensus on this list that 
charging is wrong (I have said it for years, since 2003 when I 
implemented the charity donation I said it was wrong.  I said that 
collecting the money yourself for yourself is a VERY wrong practice.  
Chris (and others) should remember i said, "I don't like it, in fact I 
hate it, but I can't see an effective alternative")  Therefore would it 
not follow that the list which includes a lot of DNSBl operators 
(representitives from all the large ones and lots of smaller ones) 
suggesting that the Best Current Practice of not charging is actually 
the Best Current Practice...?

That said I can see why there is the argument with "MUST NOT" vs "SHOULD 
NOT" because I argued some years ago (version 5?) that it should be 
"SHOULD NOT" because there are those (here even) that will point at any 
DNSBl and the clause where that DNSBl fails to meet the BCP and use it 
as a reason for stopping using the DNSBl at a management level in a 
company rather than clearing up listings and stopping spam.  That 
practice IMHO is against the purpose of the BCP which is a guide to how 
one should operate (rather than give so called rules/law/policy on how 
it should be run.)

Does that make sense?

Regards,

Michelle

---

From: Florian Weimer <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2011 20:27:03 +0100

* Michelle Sullivan:

> None of which charge, and there is a general consensus on this list
> that charging is wrong (I have said it for years, since 2003 when I
> implemented the charity donation I said it was wrong.

Are you referring to charges for removal, or just charging for access
to the DNSBL?

---

From: Michelle Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2011 16:41:50 +0100

Florian Weimer wrote:
> _________

Removal.

Shells

---

From: Michelle Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2011 16:41:50 +0100

Removal.

Shells