> John, I agree that your draft is clever. But I think it's really > stretching DNS way beyond what it was designed for and it might be > time to look at a different approach. To paraphrase the old saying, > when all you have is DNS, every problem looks like a lookup.
To be honest, my first reaction to the proposal was similar. Additionally, I'm a bit worried by the complexity we add to a previously extremely simple protocol. >From my perspective as an operator of a whitelist, I have three main concerns: 1) I want to be able to manage the load on my (public, for-free) infrastructure. 2) I want to make it easy for filters to use our data (both in development and operations). 3) I want to get some insight into what is being queried (to identify good [and bad] e-mail senders we don't know about yet). John's proposal should help me with #1, and possibly with #2, since it is mostly an evolution of existing concepts and tool chains. Unfortunately, #3 will get much harder. -- Matthias
