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

Joseph Touch <> Mon, 17 August 2020 18:52 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BAE53A0962 for <>; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 11:52:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.318
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: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Nvrmek0Pupdt for <>; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 11:52:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4D1193A095C for <>; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 11:52:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed;; 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 ([]:61916 helo=[]) by with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from <>) 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 \(3608.\))
From: Joseph Touch <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2020 11:52:06 -0700
Cc: Toerless Eckert <>,
Message-Id: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <>
To: Christian Huitema <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.
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 -
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain -
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain -
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: authenticated_id:
X-From-Rewrite: unmodified, already matched
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [arch-d] A Public Option for the Core
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: open discussion forum for long/wide-range architectural issues <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2020 18:52:14 -0000

> On Aug 17, 2020, at 8:19 AM, Christian Huitema <> 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?