Jeff Chan wrote:
BTW This is definitely off topic.
Yes, but it allowed me to add Wolfgang's proposal.
For on topic debates on an the ASRG list compare http://mid.gmane.org/20051101010626.J73031@simone.iecc.com http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.asrg/11079
Relevant also for SURBL, because SURBL and OPM are the important lists with "many" sets represented by bits.
The draft got it IMHO still wrong for 127.0.0.1, using bit 0 is a really bad idea as long as bits 1 up to 23 can be clear (as for SURBL, but not OPM, OPM always uses 127.1.0.x with bit 16 set).
But SURBL doesn't pass one minimal sanity test, as already mentioned here some months ago:
http://multi.surbl.org:80 (and http://surbl.org:80) should exist with an explanation for MULTI (SURBL).
| Most DNSxLs also contain an A record at the DNSxL's name that | points to a web server, so that anyone wishing to learn about | the bad.example.net DNSBL can check http://bad.example.net.
Bye, Frank