Subject: RE: draft-danisch-dns-rr-smtp-02.txt

From: Bruce Campbell <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2003 10:38:42 +0200 (CEST)

On Wed, 4 Jun 2003, Dean Anderson wrote:

> On Wed, 4 Jun 2003, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
>
> > It is quite possible to solve the problem of long term abuse in a protocol
> > where there is a means of establishing reputation. Extrapolation from
> > abstract principles of what is not possible rarely results in correct
> > statements. A problem may not be perfectly solvable but it can be
> > sufficiently solvable.
>
> This is nothing other than a blacklist scheme.

Phillip's statement or the draft?  The draft appears to be attempting to
set out a whitelisting scheme that is controlled by the owners of the
domain in question.  ( ie, the 'lists' that it provides are those of
allowed servers/ranges. )

Phillip's statement could also be considered to be a whitelisting scheme,
in that he mentions establishing the reputation (identify) of, I presume,
the participants in a transaction over a given protocol.

I can't see how either (Phillip's statement or the draft) could be
considered to be a 'blacklist' scheme, mainly because neither purport to
list servers/ranges which are _not_ allowed.

--==--
Bruce.

--
to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>