> standardizing them and formally recommending their use I'm not aware of any language in the current draft that recommends that people use DNSBLs. What it does say is that if you use or publish DNSBLs, here's how they work so you can, you know, interoperate and all that. As I'm sure everyone is aware, there are large numbers of independently written implementations, both publishers and users of DNSBLs, so they seem ripe to me for standardization. > standards for what gets addresses onto --and, more important, off > of-- those lists. Some other people are working on a separate document codifying best practices based on the experience of both people who run widely used highly accurate DNSBLs and operators of large mail systems that use them. It should come along in the next month or so and might be BCP or Informational. But I have to say I am concerned that it will be picked to death by people whose opinions of DNSBLs haven't been reexamined since they were formed based on anecdotes in the late 1990s. If you want to start picking now, feel free to do so on the ASRG list. For links see http://wiki.asrg.sp.am R's, John _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf