IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-vixie-dns-rpz-04.txt

Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at> Mon, 19 December 2016 11:00 UTC

Return-Path: <dot@dotat.at>
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 2F7F012989C for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Dec 2016 03:00:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 Vtia1XDWPPxH for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Dec 2016 03:00:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ppsw-43.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw-43.csi.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.143]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAC2512988C for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Dec 2016 03:00:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Cam-AntiVirus: no malware found
X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://help.uis.cam.ac.uk/email-scanner-virus
Received: from grey.csi.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.57.57]:33535) by ppsw-43.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.139]:25) with esmtps (TLSv1:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) id 1cIvfh-00031w-pD (Exim 4.86_36-e07b163) (return-path <dot@dotat.at>); Mon, 19 Dec 2016 10:59:57 +0000
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2016 10:59:57 +0000
From: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>
To: ac <ac@main.me>
In-Reply-To: <20161219072930.8E646129530@ietfa.amsl.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1612191055110.14104@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk>
References: <20161218224231.GB16301@odin.ulthar.us> <em8c69a376-3e56-437d-8fe4-d70af6aa0e63@bodybag> <20161219050559.6F643129497@ietfa.amsl.com> <5CAA0C17-B3F6-4518-90EC-9B0C59D75194@fl1ger.de> <20161219072930.8E646129530@ietfa.amsl.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (DEB 23 2013-08-11)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/NyMdmym3SDbQi6h4IcHqeLOGl9A>
Cc: "dnsop@ietf.org" <dnsop@ietf.org>, Ralf Weber <dns@fl1ger.de>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-vixie-dns-rpz-04.txt
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: Mon, 19 Dec 2016 11:00:03 -0000

ac <ac@main.me> wrote:
>
> To legitimize the telling of lies and to define protocols that hides
> the truth from users, (deception) for whatever reason, is wrong.

I agree.

That is why, if you are deploying RPZ, you should do so in an ethical
manner. When someone connects to your network, you have an AUP or
something similar which informs them about how you run your network.

And when a site is blocked, you do your best to inform your users about
why it was blocked, who is responsible for the blocking, how they can
correct erroneous blocks, how they can opt out of blocking, and so forth.

This is independent of the technology you use to implement the blocking.

Tony.
-- 
f.anthony.n.finch  <dot@dotat.at>  http://dotat.at/  -  I xn--zr8h punycode
Trafalgar: Northeasterly, backing northerly later, 4 or 5, increasing 6 at
times. Moderate or rough becoming rough or very rough. Rain or showers.
Moderate or good.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email