Re: Service outages planned for April 25

Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com> Thu, 28 April 2022 11:39 UTC

Return-Path: <moore@network-heretics.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F78FC1595E5 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Apr 2022 04:39:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.752
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.752 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-1.857, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_NONE=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=messagingengine.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8NOrJU7pEwmj for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Apr 2022 04:39:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 163B2C14F749 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Apr 2022 04:39:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id A32955C010D; Thu, 28 Apr 2022 07:39:28 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 28 Apr 2022 07:39:28 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; t=1651145968; x= 1651232368; bh=6/eVAB5Y1WEmHDbRnqNblbgJMT7q4M8wPC41wj4K1LY=; b=y AA3oLUJRbOr3e1DYj/wwP/gJsuQHIsi/mXv7g6B5sOLjaXOybfsFy34lgMFgKFGH b8RAEQHZUa68JQuyQtpvzJ12vAZsrBxFUiizWNCB6wt2Qf01oiPo1X4Q/OL2/TQN heE52TeYLFcIMLaHnDjgqPbO7DhTc7vaHlvVkWsiXiHzK9FCyG1ICnPTDCobdPr+ egIexcdbguB84HS5RhEDNCQhZc+fy2t3zqp9/7FFKJIOgXgjiEes6J5gSQr160YB uPlaTwKZ4Kt8vy3HUkLZrSOYpsF5M7bgRdEmMFX4vFpnkM9EaaxXWeeBMvFb8MvB aKkxqJqxuUGmO+MwuXHjA==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:8HxqYmdmMRGyZz2cnebNbuBJLxBFCg7bpb0DGmeGMVY8rxQCi8Ixdw> <xme:8HxqYgNA87SC-iRH2QD2syf0EMPBtoQkySA4h1UuGeHndN6Dz2Q-gHIcEPBDsEMZ7 I63ZE9P9dyp2Q>
X-ME-Received: <xmr:8HxqYnhLOSsasswfGyqI61f-EW34Ldf7-old4FQJ_G4EwZdZR1SGWrAwDxg9kfpCu3RgGMwixhKcK9KR32U5iWWhaQRQo3NMFRhPXEalcASx_q4uF9k_aw>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvfedrudejgdegvdcutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpegtkfffgggfuffvvehfhfgjsegrtderredtfeejnecuhfhrohhmpefmvghithhh ucfoohhorhgvuceomhhoohhrvgesnhgvthifohhrkhdqhhgvrhgvthhitghsrdgtohhmqe enucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpedtffdtvddvieefffeigffhtdduudetheeigeeviefggfeg vdekiefhheefudejteenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrih hlfhhrohhmpehmohhorhgvsehnvghtfihorhhkqdhhvghrvghtihgtshdrtghomh
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:8HxqYj9etshGpSY-ylGohaRg9VAu2v-zvuxmXqpoKHc76itxlNxeyw> <xmx:8HxqYit_qg4FO13Hyj2IvhloRaLP5wv8mbVbDtQx0-S4ZOADD-BFJw> <xmx:8HxqYqFjY3N01U6-Dbur2m8Z1vrAZOSdDx1dncphuTW7zsRZw7zYUQ> <xmx:8HxqYj5QUPWbcYUsHfH80onmFsISjnhV-bkFSMerN-EYbJ3WT3J3xQ>
Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Thu, 28 Apr 2022 07:39:28 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------qDXXihfMCfdif8SGmpYYc0VS"
Message-ID: <2c5df733-0f86-d319-b886-81882328caa9@network-heretics.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2022 07:39:26 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.7.0
Subject: Re: Service outages planned for April 25
Content-Language: en-US
To: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
References: <dcc27c29-51f8-c2a4-8ce4-ee1a3c6cb017@nostrum.com> <66aebf8b-2835-d572-ad00-eb2df514a157@nostrum.com> <626A610B.9050508@btconnect.com> <A449287A-CDA4-4173-8691-7049488FD130@ietf.org> <664edff3-3690-995f-1c1e-ce3e6c5c1eae@network-heretics.com> <44D37C5A-74E0-4C2E-AB5D-E0AA2F846331@tzi.org> <38f9687c-293d-e5db-7796-0de4939c64bf@network-heretics.com> <AAE3C51B-0150-483C-8244-3D60BC31B19A@tzi.org>
From: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
In-Reply-To: <AAE3C51B-0150-483C-8244-3D60BC31B19A@tzi.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/s__DW4vaZXxfqgt3S7Au9sm_2m0>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2022 11:39:37 -0000

On 4/28/22 07:27, Carsten Bormann wrote:

>> While large players can create problems, the problem is certainly not limited to one "large player".   Why, for example, do "players" of any size feel the need to manually maintain lists of IP addresses of any color?
> Because this appears to them to be a viable strategy for mitigating a fundamentally (outside FUSSP) unsolvable problem.

Or because they don't have better tools.   Or if better tools exist, 
they're not widely or uniformly used by senders.

Also, why should it be a dark art to have legitimate email successfully 
delivered?

>> And "failed to create an economic and regulatory environment" also sounds like presuming a solution that conveniently makes it "somebody else's problem" so that we have an excuse to ignore it.
> Anticipating that (valid) criticism, I actually asked the question that actually would be relevant to us.
> (As I said, this will not be solved onietf@ietf.org, so please don’t answer it here.)

Another example of how IETF institutional culture promotes denial.   
Apparently we can't have discussions in the open; we must instead bury 
them so that the status quo will be perpetuated.

We're supposed to be an engineering organization.  Responsible engineers 
admit when there's a problem with their creations and look for ways to 
solve those problems, not ways to pass the buck. (Granted there are some 
things that are out of IETF's scope and it's important to keep IETF's 
scope in mind. )

Keith