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

ac <ac@main.me> Wed, 21 December 2016 05:50 UTC

Return-Path: <ac@main.me>
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 1032B12965C for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 21:50:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.791
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.791 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=main.me
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 w9MH-bSKmI-n for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 21:50:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from web.hostacc.com (hostacc.com [188.40.114.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4BFD212951C for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 21:50:07 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=main.me; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References: In-Reply-To:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Message-ID: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=SICPxnRRhGC2ZfBDrdciyX6VH2OEQaadcReyIDpl/dk=; b=aumGX8aakyZ2zzONgENECNFYy3 Gq/KZPm6rA1NRTYrN12gEh/BF6g37vSCxUEc3OMF/5VXKz7Vx78xJq8GwdvvDWE24XNaJ+H0MZ9Pn Lie1knGPBKKc307K7Y2F3YJwniZXpMe1q1IEyG24PxYXb1Fnj+Nm93YbWgBdny9XM7f6dI/7Furrp U2CyOdrmcIyyjvioEF5IFo4kwO94d0qEhqZmXlL4hdYHJJBerlzlPBvM2D6J+TAwse+1q15tInY6T 1B2O1KZ7lei9kF8XHoVwuCvMifQzL1qA0KFtK2O9uTyZ/Pvmd1quxvbsv71czIoXdiCMPQZoOqo5a m7JAX3Mg==;
Received: from [165.255.92.104] (port=33900 helo=tree.nuts.me) by web.hostacc.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from <ac@main.me>) id 1cJZmu-0007aC-9I; Wed, 21 Dec 2016 06:50:05 +0100
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2016 07:49:29 +0200
From: ac <ac@main.me>
To: Olafur Gudmundsson <ogud@ogud.com>
In-Reply-To: <AA90B2D2-4B7C-4693-ADF3-2004CC09641A@ogud.com>
References: <20161221000237.24158.qmail@ary.lan> <EBCD2226-35F7-4B18-B849-D2311F1160F8@virtualized.org> <AA90B2D2-4B7C-4693-ADF3-2004CC09641A@ogud.com>
Organization: acmain
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - web.hostacc.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - main.me
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: web.hostacc.com: authenticated_id: ac@main.me
X-Authenticated-Sender: web.hostacc.com: ac@main.me
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
Message-Id: <20161221055007.4BFD212951C@ietfa.amsl.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/n-79Dw7TU9ChJAGkbenwMgY2FAg>
Cc: "dnsop@ietf.org WG" <dnsop@ietf.org>
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: Wed, 21 Dec 2016 05:50:08 -0000

On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 22:10:20 -0500
Olafur Gudmundsson <ogud@ogud.com> wrote:
> +1 
> I agree this is ugly as ugly can be but that ship has sailed. 
> For interoperability sake lets just publish this with a note that
> says something like this;
> 
> This is documentation of fielded useful protocol.
> This is ugly protocol and it copying it is strongly discouraged. 
> 
>     Olafur 

-1 
Seemingly, I am still the sole and only -1 although there are serious
concerns expressed by many about not only the ethics, but the eventual
rise of a non open and non free Internet and many other valid comments
speaking out against the direction this is leading and enabling.

I once made a very cool tool, it improved the life of many people as it
allowed anyone to take over any pc running a certain operating system
with the sole and great purpose of helping more users. It too was
published, improved, altered and distributed widely

RPZ is like that.

It solves a serious problem and helps and is in wide use.

Quite obviously this draft is going to be published. I hope that by
eventually speaking out I have caused some people to think about what
they are doing, whom they are enabling and what this will be used for.

I also hope that what Olafur Gudmundsson said, may be considered and I
am very much +1 for that.

Just to explain my strong reactions somewhat better:

Look at the email headers of my email, I am an African.

My concerns are real, they are valid. I am not just some troll or
whatever sitting somewhere in his mothers basement and thinking
up new ways of wasting your bits. I am a dev/sys/ops with decades of
experience.

Consider that the following is very possible:

===
RPZ will be legitimized by this draft, it will be used and living human
beings may actually die because of server software.
===

And, this is my final word on this, I apologize if anyone feels that I
have wasted their time or offended them in any way. This was never my
intention.

Andre