On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 12:42 AM, Ted Mittelstaedt <t...@ipinc.net> wrote:
> Thus, we can safely make the assumption that any mailserver is going > to follow the model of a single host per /64. Thus it will ALSO be > just as useful for whitelists to have the same granularity - a /64 - > as it would be for blacklists. /64 as a default policy for a whitelist may make sense, but the protocol *must* allow for different granularities as well -- both higher and lower granularities for reasons outlined in another mail (eg shared hosting environments). > What this really calls for is a reworking of the SpamAssassin code. > SA is going to have to start caching the results of any IPv6 DNS > BL queries for a set period of time, probably 2 days. Any IPv6 Cache should observe RRs TTL. > address in a BL needs to invalidate all other IPv6 addresses in > the /64 that the IPv6 address is in for 2 days. There is no need to do > further querying, nor is there a need for the scheme enumerated in > the RFC draft. Can you be really, absolutely sure that there will never, ever be a need to report reputation on anything else than /64? -- Matthias
