On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 05:45:54AM +0200, Fred Baker wrote: > Personally, I think this discussion is getting a little strange. It > reminds me of a rabbi's discussion of what constitutes work and > therefore may not be done on the sabbath. I agree. Next thing you know, they'll be telling us that "spam" doesn't refer to Hormel's canned meat product! That said, Tony's suggestion of "IPv6 whitelist" (and associated definition) seems fair to me (especially since it's actually the resolvers rather than the records that are being whitelisted). That said, the shorthand will be just as confusing to some, since if "whitelist" really is wedded to spam in your mind, "IPv6 whitelist" will mean "spam whitelist that uses IPv6" (whatever that means). Personally, I don't have this problem. I've always understood whitelists and blacklists to be generic problem-solving tools that happen to be applied to the spam filtering problem. I'm confident that people who didn't before will quickly adjust to the terms being used more broadly, just as they did with "spam" (and "computer"). -- Scott Schmit _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf