Re: [Add] draft-arkko-abcd-distributed-resolver-selection

[Jari Arkko <[e-mail]>]

Ted, Chris,

> If I compare the above to the set of perspectives outlined in ICANN SAC109, my expectation is that the resulting net change in the ability to meet their needs is as follows:
> 
> 4.1 (Parents):  Negative
> 4.2 (Enterprise Network Managers):  Negative
> 4.3 (Dissidents, Protesters and Others):  Positive
> 4.4 (Internet Service Providers):  Negative
> 
> Would you agree with this assessment? Or have I missed something crucial?
> 
> 
> I'm not familiar enough with SAC 109 to comment, so I'll leave that to others.  My personal belief is that the ability to choose what resolvers belong in the set is important enough that it should map to the client's controller (which might be an individual, the parent of child, the enterprise owner of an employee device).  

I agree with Ted of course. I’d actually suggest also that there are different perspectives on what one considers trustworthy*. We did not want to discuss that under this draft. Rather, our goal was to discuss whether using multiple resolvers would provide a privacy benefit, not whether you trust a particular entity or a particular type of an entity. Why we mentioned something about different policies in Section 6.2 was not because we wanted to take a position, but rather the fact *if* you use multiple servers, then *if* their policies are very different this may result in unexpected results.

Jari

*) Including whether one is concerned about accuracy vs. privacy and whose control you are worried about.