XML Based (CPDL)
Consent Policy Definition Language

In support of the ASRG (Anti-Spam Research Group), we are working to develop an open standard for describing a consent policy. Based on our own research we believe the best route to a working Consent Policy Definition Language is via XML.

The methodology we have proposed for this work is based on "watching where the grass wears out and then pouring the sidewalk on the bald spots." In other words, we are publishing a work-in-progress example of an XML based CPDL. Your review of this work is STRONGLY encouraged. Please post your comments to the ASRG list in the appropriate context. We will rework this example based on comments and suggestions in the ASRG until the example stabilizes and then we will write a specification that follows from the example.

The file will live here: ConsentPolicyExample.xml

It is hoped that an XML based CPDL will not only satisfy the constraints set forth in the ASRG charter but also will be relatively easy to implement in software so that it might become a widely adopted standard.

Some design goals that we feel are important.

• The standard must be open and extensible.
• Well known policy elements (such as DNSbl use) should be represented in a standard way.
• It should be relatively easy to share, aggregate, and derive policies within and between systems.

XML is by no means the only possible solution for a working CPDL. In fact some have suggested that we explicitly avoid XML. We recommend that any other proposals should be developed in parallel by similar means and that all proposals will compete in the market place (and among the researchers) for a dominant position. Ultimately whatever works best will win out (we hope).

Editorial Policy:

What I want to express personally here is that I feel strongly that negative and suppressive comments on this work or any competing proposals are a waste of time and should not be indulged. Rather, if someone feels strongly that an alternative language or methodology is the better solution then they should develop the alternative so that we (collectively) can compare the relative merits. The kinds of comments I hope to see for each CPDL proposal will be constructive and intended toward problem solving. A good metric for a good comment in this view is that if you wish to express a problem or concern with this work you would also recommend an alternative that would improve the work. For example, you should say "why not do it this way" rather than saying "don't do it".

Our Efforts:

This site will be updated periodically as work progresses and time permits.

Comments should be made to the ASRG list and not to us directly so that the entire ASRG will remain up to date on current thinking. We will be monitoring the list and participating as much as possible - and we will do our best to keep this example up to date based on the apparent consensus in the ASRG list. If we fall behind we will make provisions for other volunteer "editors" to assist.

Anything posted on this site regarding this CPDL proposal and ASRG efforts should be considered as being in the public domain. This effort is for everyone's benefit and therefore belongs to everyone.

THANKS FOR YOUR HELP!

_M

Pete McNeil (Madscientist)