> there's a lot of evil e-mail messages out there; the cost of 
> letting even one of those messages through is unacceptable, 
> so false positives are OK. 

This is precisely the sort of thing that should have been 
covered in much more detail in the Security Considerations
section of the draft.

> I have no problem with the IETF documenting the world as it exists.
> That's what an informational track RFC does.  

> (where, "oh well, we'll just block the whole /48 or /32" 
> might have unfortunate side effects not forseen yet)

Again, this is missing from the Security Considerations.

--Michael Dillon
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Reply via email to