> 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@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf