Re: [Add] My principles for discovery

John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> Thu, 26 March 2020 00:13 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
X-Original-To: add@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: add@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B2A33A07FC for <add@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 Mar 2020 17:13:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.259
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.259 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DATE_IN_PAST_03_06=1.592, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=hnorHG/R; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=q52hL7Er
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4RixOSCwHFWJ for <add@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 Mar 2020 17:13:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C54323A00C0 for <add@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 Mar 2020 17:13:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 28679 invoked from network); 26 Mar 2020 00:13:32 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=7005.5e7bf3ac.k2003; bh=Np4BXaQ+RxRnczTF+GHax+5BHpyZgE2yeEf92ZTr+WY=; b=hnorHG/RMh+5UBHSbTknjzvlPAY7wWLaeNPtyfv8x/3QV8YdjzAFYXV03QJjv2W+HfDxIMIycUDlkUy34zhyRX0UVNgW1RkFGjQu1vRHhtcO1fLeYkSE31AFfbbDAHyfUZsEZ6d+54/SeuCz9Zpar4WI6yFZOZY+SSGBdSUe1OTgZFcEJeWCWXt0CC6lceFTZcmB89L3Fg0c+NtgYwFH5DFXpgjC6uwvp24m50Fhy+VMLGtS+b484VSWxHn4/Kfo
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=7005.5e7bf3ac.k2003; bh=Np4BXaQ+RxRnczTF+GHax+5BHpyZgE2yeEf92ZTr+WY=; b=q52hL7Erddaj9n6N2ma1+TdB9eFtr6XuVPABNN1OJxCFpw5XmFsB5y8mGsb2nk+1ICzIO29Re7SqscAuVUDpigc190pOzDlZSXH0gVz4Y4K/DGVAtGT0Uwyc/MR7eCrUH4tjsH8XmvvlEM2z4RQETBxJ1itAPnyPZc//oAaH1rvk1WiBSRAPEPkOuKKTKNWhMjEspTiaeQnVe82QPTxT3o4j80i+GXRGSx5dmGDFJPc3SskVSg0WLFczG4rUrZA7
Received: from iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTP via TCP6; 26 Mar 2020 00:13:31 -0000
Received: by iecc.com (Postfix, from userid 501) id C1380169DB45; Wed, 25 Mar 2020 20:13:30 -0400 (EDT)
Date: 25 Mar 2020 16:58:44 -0400
Message-Id: <20200325205845.337FA169C024@ary.qy>
From: "John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com>
To: add@ietf.org
Cc: mcmanus@ducksong.com
In-Reply-To: <CAOdDvNpVNbEgy3djk5aOD2FK+Tz7Bh9=zv2ZNuQYktD_mMorrg@mail.gmail.com>
Organization: Taughannock Networks
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/add/ryjlZWJ6Tt-hSQ_BRGyVN4k3PTw>
Subject: Re: [Add] My principles for discovery
X-BeenThere: add@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Applications Doing DNS <add.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/add>, <mailto:add-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/add/>
List-Post: <mailto:add@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:add-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/add>, <mailto:add-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2020 00:13:36 -0000

In article <CAOdDvNpVNbEgy3djk5aOD2FK+Tz7Bh9=zv2ZNuQYktD_mMorrg@mail.gmail.com> you write:
>I think this is a pretty strong summary and a useful contribution -
>thanks!. I might add that their view may include the scope of their
>recommendation. (e.g. I'm a general recursive, I'm for this split horizon,
>I'm for this authoritative, etc...) and, if we were making mission
>statements, emphasize that authentication is something they are implicitly
>conveying during presentation (even if its the absence of authentication).

This is reminding me of the way people used to build spam filters, and
not in a good way.  When the filters didn't do the right thing with
messages, the nerdy response was to add ever more knobs and buttons
that the users could control to manually adjust the filtering rules.

It didn't work -- most users didn't understand the controls, and for
the ones that did, or thought they did, it was a support nightmare as
they demanded ever more finegrained knobs they could try to tweak.

What everyone does now is to have a very small set of standard
filtering policies that work pretty well, typically one per system or
one per enterprise in shared systems, and to the extent users can
control their filtering, they do it implicitly by putting addresses
they know in their address book and moving messages in and out of the
spam folder.

This isn't a perfect analogy, but I'm quite confident that the fewer
decisions we expect users or their proxies to make, the more likely
this is to work.

R's,
John