On 12 Feb 2019, at 21:48, Paul Vixie wrote:

> whether the situation turns out to be temporary or not is important to your 
> final argument. probably you shouldn't go there so soon. spammers also 
> believe that network operators should not be able to control their own 
> networks, and malware authors, and botnet creators, and IoT innovators, and 
> surveillance capitalists. none of those matters seem like they are, or will 
> ever be, settled. so, none are "temporary".

The current legal system and court decisions require access providers to have 
some control. Today it is "enough" for the access providers to block DNS lookup 
of certain domain names. We on THIS list understand how easy it is to go around 
that kind of blocking, but that does not matter. It is enough for the legal 
systems in the world.

If the control over the DNS lookups is no longer possible by the access 
provider, then the access providers by law have to use other tools to control 
the traffic from their customers.

So, it is not only their choice.

   Patrik

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

Reply via email to