IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [arch-d] A Public Option for the Core

Joseph Touch <touch@strayalpha.com> Mon, 17 August 2020 18:52 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@strayalpha.com>
X-Original-To: architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BAE53A0962 for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 11:52:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.318
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.318 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=strayalpha.com
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 Nvrmek0Pupdt for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 11:52:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from server217-4.web-hosting.com (server217-4.web-hosting.com [198.54.116.98]) (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 4D1193A095C for <architecture-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 11:52:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=strayalpha.com; s=default; h=To:References:Message-Id:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To: From:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=7EvUKMUGw+deZfZFsKs7TD3rG/x/ZwzXsRojUfoPLGA=; b=BloSI/QNMpkN+L+2t6aiv8Pct 8UQbMMAaAXwUIqcDj77/AnHveZr9f7bl/DpRx7ejWQgAX6SaGkU2+Jp3K0m2QDkLH9R5mOhaK8IVS HG0puPgCC5X6a05hw4cJ9qrcsfBDNj0ucl97OLGSxmAvWEksRWSYXdtS059r03GITYWaX0uUbGf7k jLpJdG++gFzB0wsjh6+okk0uaGgpNjYkuq2RMHkfV1omUPwbNY14Q7V4oCPETCOG6HV6DsaOujNhy d9xg8yHX693kKMJSCYW8e6+dn5TLn9epc2ygY0+sefQ6iHVBzeMb6IT2OUkZ9Yd90HuFu4aqH7XUQ YM4ifpzmQ==;
Received: from cpe-172-250-225-198.socal.res.rr.com ([172.250.225.198]:61916 helo=[192.168.1.14]) by server217.web-hosting.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from <touch@strayalpha.com>) id 1k7kEp-003Daf-5J; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 14:52:11 -0400
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_D5E6F9C1-4E65-4455-8FF2-9E9A456B518D"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.1\))
From: Joseph Touch <touch@strayalpha.com>
In-Reply-To: <0e575946-dfd4-7753-8c34-47987d0b3c7e@huitema.net>
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2020 11:52:06 -0700
Cc: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>, architecture-discuss@ietf.org
Message-Id: <DE7895D0-0EBB-4C78-9944-0DC203E14C37@strayalpha.com>
References: <754DE168-DF3B-4471-A145-39C6143E538A@comcast.net> <FB381338-A278-45B2-A40B-3A065E3A3ED1@strayalpha.com> <1fd2ed7d-d4bc-c5b7-9a4a-7966d5e60513@gmail.com> <20200817074637.GW62842@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <60B2B44D-5E6D-4CB2-AD63-1A8CB846BFA3@strayalpha.com> <0e575946-dfd4-7753-8c34-47987d0b3c7e@huitema.net>
To: Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.1)
X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server217.web-hosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - strayalpha.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: server217.web-hosting.com: authenticated_id: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Authenticated-Sender: server217.web-hosting.com: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-From-Rewrite: unmodified, already matched
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/architecture-discuss/prFbKnEMyxlPOciuftIzHPoL1NI>
Subject: Re: [arch-d] A Public Option for the Core
X-BeenThere: architecture-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: open discussion forum for long/wide-range architectural issues <architecture-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/architecture-discuss>, <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/architecture-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:architecture-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/architecture-discuss>, <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2020 18:52:14 -0000


> On Aug 17, 2020, at 8:19 AM, Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net> wrote:
> 
>>> hen one can have a trusted layer that would map this information to
>>> actual network service requirements/advisory information.
>> 
>> That’s an implementation detail inside the endpoint. The *network* should not be doing that inference:
>> 
>> a) because it is typically made to favor the provider, not the user
>> b) because it’s often incorrect, either because the needed info isn’t available (encryption) or deliberately obscured (running DNS over ports other than 53)
> At the bottom are issues of knowledge and trust.
> 

The mapping is hard, but inferring it is only harder (vs. letting the user/host decide).

As to trust, it only matters that an intermediate hasn’t forged a new header. You don’t need to trust the user - if they want to map their email to high-priority and pay for that usage, that’s their business (literally). If that’s more service than they paid for, then drop packets.

Or do you think UPS/DHL/etc should open every 2-day delivery to make sure it actually had to be there in 2 days?

Joe

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email