On 06/12/2012 05:32 AM, Vernon Schryver wrote: > Joe and Joan should be using their ISP's validating, load balancing, > well (or at least somewhat) maintained DNS servers, just as they should > be using their ISP's SMTP systems. > Just as Apple, Adobe, Google, Microsoft, and Mozilla are now installing > updates on their computers without their let, leave, hindrance, or > even notice. > > Again, if it's sauce for port 25, then why not port 53? > > Is it sauce for port 25?
Any systematic port blocking is contributing to the road to hell. From an engingeering point of view it seems obvious that by this you are burning resources for ever, and as it's only symptomatic treatment there is no real end to it. >From a governance point of view it's even worse: push everything over the ISPs hardware and you end up with a nice point of control, where you can stop access to (alleged) child abuse, (alleged) terrorism, (alleged) copyright infringement, (alleged) political speech... So spinning this line of thought further, you could end with an port 80, no encryption Internet. Because that is enough. Gilles -- Fondation RESTENA - DNS-LU 6, rue Coudenhove-Kalergi L-1359 Luxembourg tel: (+352) 424409 fax: (+352) 422473 _______________________________________________ dns-operations mailing list dns-operations@lists.dns-oarc.net https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-operations dns-jobs mailing list https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-jobs
