IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

william manning <chinese.apricot@gmail.com> Mon, 13 March 2017 05:35 UTC

Return-Path: <chinese.apricot@gmail.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 2A4F8129532 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 12 Mar 2017 22:35:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.698
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.698 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 bOg7LqIosiqc for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 12 Mar 2017 22:35:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io0-x22c.google.com (mail-io0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BC05D126CD8 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Sun, 12 Mar 2017 22:35:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id g6so77915154ioj.1 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Sun, 12 Mar 2017 22:35:20 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=1s1d2YiR60kMTfZH4JySrqG31arOokXNIcUkivPCdY8=; b=SLf28KOw7P6tXbWn2N53XWjxNPE4xT1CaUFwye2jHdwO2uirE7pvxTUlHokpp//XG0 1AKbLh2Jqd3x4n8ldm7JmGTDs1VzwHHVp3dJ0omirtaEQGctq8vRdeNJQrNqFiQg18+E S5SNNfCV1K4bvTFGqtfAzoVgchilkEY901xnM7rfasFXd445xLboSOsyPG1aPnQkqgXV N6eTv2Xo+ndLi4AnSsmVC1DwBusmGAbgVhSLhLkED41jWNAZ5zbjQDGaBgrx7kq5wZM0 ZpS8MAYHniXBIPuvrSZgBosrkmywhgjCdZkb7PbdZ+p27qIgf8zlnQtidEyYsi8TOdmL FyMQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=1s1d2YiR60kMTfZH4JySrqG31arOokXNIcUkivPCdY8=; b=Qw37gsheoVIXL2YYp/+1ZW+YOOvpTtVZIwqVyd4OOoWimS3Lf5GQsTmJsHNNPAt620 2r/Ls0OzAeMfqsSv71H974zsfaD9YFYZ0HLrZFezeQpvkwuDHtu6j5xo5Mx5lmqOZlWh LwS8XQlKUfIAYh+1ZqGA0082C41IChbZ14/QdYfjiYzGi/2LcPF9k2Lm+NNpFnl3EfwF gbGB9Q/MXlQMW9tTN/rr+qdxJtoZ4ohtY/kaIBS3qwWio+8LUnyT6Aef+9ltPOQLaEBG aI27nd6+VHC3fiMhGuCDs2KnTmGmRU2gnK9tzwgHNuw+bX5SMAbXruRwn4B7GpfA19kt bz+Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39nVYb9eDN30/99R7RoYjh5Wfq9RARZfG6LBeBIEXR5pJqimBEgSKCOWO6JpKxmkFw8fQeTUDJGKVyAx2w==
X-Received: by 10.107.134.94 with SMTP id i91mr25883152iod.0.1489383320001; Sun, 12 Mar 2017 22:35:20 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.107.159.136 with HTTP; Sun, 12 Mar 2017 22:35:19 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <fa0b1bd1-f7b8-c3bc-58a3-397c1b118370@bogus.com>
References: <CADyWQ+ETSd199ok0fgh=PB=--hW7buPgSoCg22aK51Bk4xxBmw@mail.gmail.com> <CADyWQ+GUDg2iA+MQ9xjNLDVvRgnd9PD=pLBNNvp0xK3UZVSqTA@mail.gmail.com> <1AD82FB6-735A-4124-A0A3-2158EC567AD6@nohats.ca> <CAHw9_iK+SWiHZwGgHZRO2T1MLVQZS-2BaeZBzyUuZ0iWHX2ZjA@mail.gmail.com> <fa0b1bd1-f7b8-c3bc-58a3-397c1b118370@bogus.com>
From: william manning <chinese.apricot@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 22:35:19 -0700
Message-ID: <CACfw2hht7SLQX=X85K=CbmxTkd5g9H5+DquQNcetr0Ahgnn+5A@mail.gmail.com>
To: joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a113ec89cb974f5054a9613b2"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/hvp35P_7J4g7MkQ0ZMwpD400IjM>
Cc: tjw ietf <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>, dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>, Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
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: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 05:35:22 -0000

Joel,

I'd be happy to see the document proceed under two conditions:  1) it
becomes a WG document, subject to IETF change control, and 2) that the
disclaimer requested back on 20170103 be added to the document. To refresh
the collective mind, here is the missing text:

applicability statement.

This draft is documents a process and method for intercepting DNS queries
and fabricating responses to redirect the querier into a walled garden or
enclave that is NOT part of the open Internet. Adoption and acceptance of
this draft is an acknowledgement that the IETF, the IAB and ISOC reject the
principles espoused at https://open-stand.org/about-us/principles/, in
particular article 3.  Collective Empowerment insofar as the evolution of
the DNS is concerned.

On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 3:52 PM, joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com> wrote:

> On 3/10/17 5:07 AM, Warren Kumari wrote:
> > Once a document becomes a WG document the authors are required to
> > incorporate WG consensus.
> >
> > If this does not / is not happening, the chairs have the option /
> > responsibility to replace the authors with ones that do...
>
> If there's no consensus for advancing an altered or unaltered document
> then that's a problem; but not one that hasn't happened before. Consent
> is pert of concensus.
>
> > W
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 3:27 PM, Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Mar 9, 2017, at 18:54, tjw ietf <tjw.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> We’re going to go ahead and adopt it for DNSOP, with the intention of
> >>> resolving the concerns people expressed by keeping the status as
> >>> informational (not standards track) and making sure the cautions and
> >>> limitations the WG discussed on the use of RPZ are clear in the
> document.
> >>
> >> I don't understand how this works.
> >>
> >> The authors clearly stated the document will describe only what is
> currently implemented and they were
> >> not willing to make changes. How can this ever turn into a real WG
> document?
> >>
> >> Paul
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> DNSOP mailing list
> >> DNSOP@ietf.org
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email