Re: [DNSOP] DNSOP Call for Adoption draft-vixie-dns-rpz

"Ralf Weber" <dns@fl1ger.de> Thu, 22 December 2016 08:10 UTC

Return-Path: <dns@fl1ger.de>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4323E1295AA for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Dec 2016 00:10:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.498
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.498 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=3.399, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 Xo-ZL0lEgkEF for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Dec 2016 00:10:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp.guxx.net (nyx.guxx.net [85.10.208.173]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99E061293D8 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Dec 2016 00:10:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: by nyx.guxx.net (Postfix, from userid 107) id C59A85F40690; Thu, 22 Dec 2016 09:10:46 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [192.168.2.129] (p5DD471F2.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [93.212.113.242]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by nyx.guxx.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 462355F4043E; Thu, 22 Dec 2016 09:10:46 +0100 (CET)
From: "Ralf Weber" <dns@fl1ger.de>
To: "william manning" <chinese.apricot@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2016 09:10:45 +0100
Message-ID: <8369AAC2-C70A-4D36-A68F-C74E937C7C55@fl1ger.de>
In-Reply-To: <CACfw2hj4VfuqsM-jRpxNc+bWNsUcSid+Y=r9U5jsA-0ZLbLRUg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADyWQ+ETSd199ok0fgh=PB=--hW7buPgSoCg22aK51Bk4xxBmw@mail.gmail.com> <C18E2D4E-EE89-4AF6-B4A0-FAD1A7A01B5E@vpnc.org> <5248A099-7E1F-437A-A1B7-C300F917D273@fl1ger.de> <CACfw2hj4VfuqsM-jRpxNc+bWNsUcSid+Y=r9U5jsA-0ZLbLRUg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.6r5318)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/5jhcoLTTmA2YDtFVBiBTkI0XP-4>
Cc: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] DNSOP Call for Adoption draft-vixie-dns-rpz
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2016 08:10:48 -0000

Moin!

On 21 Dec 2016, at 15:36, william manning wrote:
> the complaints about operator participation in the IETF go back decades.
>  no news there.
So you don't want operator participation in the IETF?

> in fact, there are operator driven fora for just such activities, DNS-OARC
> comes to mind.
DNS-OARC AFAIK isn't about producing documents

> this draft actively destroys trust in the DNS, which reduces trust in the
> Internet overall.
I fail to see that and remember to most people the Internet these days is
delivered by large operators, so if you want to get stuff deployed at scale
you have to work with them. DNSSEC adoption on the recursing side e.g was
non existent until Comcast and later Google decided to do validation. Now
it is double digit percentage of all clients sitting behind an validating
resolver.

> is that really what you want out of the IETF?
I want the IETF to be relevant and the stuff of documents we produce to
actually being deployed on the Internet.

So long
-Ralf