Sometimes, people say "this shouldn't even be an Informational RFC because people can't tell the difference between the types of RFCs and they'll think the IETF supports the technology". Sometimes, people say "this shouldn't be a standards-track RFC but it is OK for it to be an Informational RFC because people notice the difference and think the difference is important". Sometimes, those are the same people talking about different documents. The IETF has repeatedly tried and failed to fix the "RFC levels" problem. It is absurd to have the debate repeatedly and try to hold documents to one temporary belief or the other. Unless we fix the RFC levels problem, we can only rely on the content of the document itself. To my reading, this document does not promote the use of blacklists, much less of crappy blacklists (of which I am an erroneous target). The text seems to be all about bits-on-the-wire interoperability that affects large and small ISPs. --Paul Hoffman, Director --VPN Consortium _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf