IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-arends-private-use-tld

Philip Homburg <pch-dnsop-4@u-1.phicoh.com> Thu, 18 June 2020 16:27 UTC

Return-Path: <pch-b9D3CB0F5@u-1.phicoh.com>
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 1083A3A0A9E for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 09:27:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.895
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.895 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 bf-QmxMC6M1f for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 09:27:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stereo.hq.phicoh.net (stereo.hq.phicoh.net [130.37.15.35]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CFE043A0A8B for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 09:27:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stereo.hq.phicoh.net (localhost [::ffff:127.0.0.1]) by stereo.hq.phicoh.net with esmtp (TLS version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305) (Smail #157) id m1jlxOD-0000PuC; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 18:27:45 +0200
Message-Id: <m1jlxOD-0000PuC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
To: dnsop@ietf.org
Cc: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
From: Philip Homburg <pch-dnsop-4@u-1.phicoh.com>
Sender: pch-b9D3CB0F5@u-1.phicoh.com
References: <CADyWQ+F=JA6fogcy_JGRJaZv=Hq52ozgmY5gmzfPm=1oHcJXKg@mail.gmail.com> <427141d8-c164-35a7-0e02-0961865d4468@nic.cz> <af8c285c-6e08-7457-8ca8-b088e96dc251@nic.cz> <C93E56C1-4CD9-4143-BA04-76CE059D2556@dnss.ec> <alpine.LRH.2.22.394.2006181149250.20534@bofh.nohats.ca> <m1jlxDA-0000TsC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <alpine.LRH.2.22.394.2006181218500.20534@bofh.nohats.ca>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 18 Jun 2020 12:20:18 -0400 (EDT) ." <alpine.LRH.2.22.394.2006181218500.20534@bofh.nohats.ca>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2020 18:27:45 +0200
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/Zf7PbB3ZXp3tMJtkxQIkcSh4L1M>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-arends-private-use-tld
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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, 18 Jun 2020 16:27:49 -0000

>But that problem is independent of the domain names used. If the CPE
>sends queries to the ISP, the deed has already been done, regardless of
>what the ISP does with the query (send it to the root, to telus.com or
>drops it)

Sending a query to the root, which is considered a collection of neutral
parties that try to respect privacy, sounds better on paper than sending
traffic to a random manufacturer without having the relevant contracts for
data processing in place.

Futhermore, for a non-existing TLD, queries don't have to go further than 
the resolver.

Of course, the ISP can try to filter those queries. But a significant 
fraction of users and/or applications use a public resolver which will not
filter.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email