On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 04:35:48PM +, Ray Bellis wrote:
> On 20/12/2016 16:33, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> > Counter-question: of what value is documenting this current practice?
> > Anyone who is already using it can find the documentation for it from
> > their software vendor. There is nothing here that really affects the
> > rest of the DNS other than "there will be lies".
>
> The document primarily covers BIND's behaviour.
>
> It would be good if other implementations were completely compatible
> with that
Why? How does this help the "good guys" (define that as you wish)?
I'm seeing how it really helps governments cheaply create and enforce
the creation of national internets -- especially with the walled garden
features. Are those the good guys to you, or are there other benefits?
I'm also seeing how, if hijacked, the walled garden feature makes it
trivial to distribute malware to large numbers of users.
> and this also forms the baseline for potential future
> enhancements which could be under IETF change control.
If this is being submitted to the WG, this document will already be
under IETF & WG change control. If that's not the intent, then the
document should not be adopted.
--
Scott Schmit
___
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
