https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6728
--- Comment #14 from D. Stussy <[email protected]> 2012-01-19 19:30:18 UTC --- RFC 6471 was published recently. It has some things we may want to consider in determining the status of a DNS based list: Section 3.3: Listing 127.0.0.2 => DNSBL is operational (a must list condition). A response outside of 127/8 => DNSBL is NOT operational. Section 3.5: Listing 127.0.0.1 => DNSBL is NOT operational. My comment (to the authors when it was a draft RFC) about returning 0.0.0.0 for queries refused (when a DNS RC of REFUSED isn't implemented) apparently fell on deaf ears, beyond it being outside of 127/8 and thus indicating that the DNSBL is "not operational" for the querying client. However, that does not mean that we can't consider it a special case as previously proposed (as the all-zeroes address isn't a routable unicast address). I do think it makes it clear that returning 127.0.0.255 (or any other value in 127/8) is INCORRECT when a query is "refused." -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug.
