Again, to repeat myself once more, one more time, I am asking that we actually decide what to recommend, and not just say "we all already all know what the right behavior is." If we all agreed on what the correct behavior was, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Maybe if we tried to describe what we all think the correct behavior was, we would realize that we do agree on it, but we haven't done that yet. And the possible set of all behaviors is more complicated than you suggest.
On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 4:32 AM, Vittorio Bertola < [email protected]> wrote: > > Il 21 agosto 2018 alle 19.36 David Conrad <[email protected]> ha > scritto: > > > > Vittorio, > > > > > > Perhaps I’m misunderstanding: are you saying the folks who provide > resolution services in a DoH world would have incentive to not follow basic > security measures? > > The definition of what is safe for browsing and what is not is highly > local - each network and each country have their policies. How could a > QuadX operator implement a filter that fits the needs of the entire planet? > > (Unless we imagine a model in which the DoH operator receives policies > from networks and countries and applies them depending on where the request > is coming from.) > > Also, network operators have a direct interest in implementing security > measures to prevent threats from spreading to more devices on their > network. What's the incentive for a centralized DoH operator to spend money > and time in security filters? > > Regards, > -- > > Vittorio Bertola | Head of Policy & Innovation, Open-Xchange > [email protected] > Office @ Via Treviso 12, 10144 Torino, Italy > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop >
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
