On 2003-11-28, at 06.57, use.signature.ripe@awot.fi wrote:
Probably. The dns-wg is about dns, not about anti-spam. Maybe you should take your ideas to the antispam group first.
I think that is very limited thinking. If we all only think that I only care my sandbox then we have this kind of problem. It was one of RIPE s person said after I was published this idea in a antispamlist that maybe also open discuss on dns-wg list ...
What Jaap is saying is that the DNS wg is dealing with DNS issues, and the RMX one is definitely not a DNS issue. The DNS part of RMX is simple, and works. The impact on SMTP, and potentially what RMX help with etc must be discussed with SMTP people, not DNS people. Of course, the membership of such groups (DNS and SMTP) is overlapping, BUT, we need to try to make sure things are discussed in the correct forum.
Why dns-wg ? Because if we (operator, ISP,...) like to build better working net, we need dns help also in this kind of solution. And my ideas (and MTAmark) need in-addr.arpa domains updating. That the reason why I published my idea also in this forum.
Correct, and DNS issues and rules are to be discussed here. Including a rule which say "one should always have RMX records if one have MX" is such a potential rule. paf