Subject: [Asrg] Last final final draft-irtf-asrg-bcp-blacklists-08

From: "John R. Levine" <[email-masked]>
Date: 11 Mar 2011 13:37:46 -0500

Chris just sent in a minor update, which you can find here:

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-irtf-asrg-bcp-blacklists-08

For people who read -07, the Diff1 button at the top of the page will 
produce a redlined diff against -07 and Diff2 will produce side by side 
diffs.

The differences are minor and are intended to be editorial.  Let us know 
if we screwed something up.

Regards,
John Levine, [email-masked], Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly

---

From: Franck Martin <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 11:27:06 +1200 (FJT)

in 1.1 can you spell DNSWL, RHSBL and URIBL ? And ASN and DNS while you are at it. I don't like unexpanded TLAs or FLAs.

Thanks

Franck Martin 
http://www.avonsys.com/ 
http://www.facebook.com/Avonsys 
http://www.linkedin.com/company/avonsys 
twitter: FranckMartin Avonsys 

Check your domain reputation: http://gurl.im/b69d4o 
Application Monitoring: http://gurl.im/4d39Gu 

----- Original Message -----
From: "John R. Levine" <[email-masked]>
To: "Anti Spam Research Group" <[email-masked]>
Sent: Friday, 11 March, 2011 10:37:46 AM
Subject: [Asrg] Last final final draft-irtf-asrg-bcp-blacklists-08

Regards,
John Levine, [email-masked], Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
[email-masked]
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg

---

From: Douglas Otis <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 15:33:23 -0700

On 3/11/11 10:37 AM, John R. Levine wrote:
>  produce a redlined diff against -07 and Diff2 will produce side by
>  side diffs.
>
>  The differences are minor and are intended to be editorial. Let us
>  know if we screwed something up.

John,

In general, this is a well written document, although some of the 
guidance reduces the role played by ISPs.  In section 2.2.3, there is 
too much emphasis on the use of temporary listings, since this will 
expose trap locations and eventually make detection less effectual for 
anyone other than ISPs monitoring for abuse remediation.  A topic fully 
overlooked by the draft.  This becomes a greater concern when dealing 
with a future where bad actors are able to employ unique IP addresses 
for every message ever sent.

As indicated in a prior message, the reference for RFC3330 should have 
been updated to RFC5735.

It is also technically and conceptually incorrect to place prohibitions 
of (third-party) donations within Section 2.2.5 Conflict of Interest.  
This prohibition should be moved to a different section.  What is meant 
by donations should have been better defined, since almost any 
requirement imposed by a listing service that incurs an additional cost 
could be incorrectly included within this category.  Lists must be 
allowed to be flexible, since many have been driven out-of-business when 
dealing with bot-net related attacks.

-Doug