On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 09:34:16AM +0000, Jim Reid <[email protected]> wrote a message of 19 lines which said:
> Why? From the client's perspective, there's no effective difference > between these. In the first case, you can talk with someone which you have some relationship with (the ISP, typically). > Their request was rejected for some policy reason and it doesn't > really matter whose policy has been applied. Well, it certainly matters to me. Think responsability, accountability, consumer choice... > Besides in situations where blocking is being done because of > someone else's say so, it's highly likely that the DNS operator will > be subject to some sort of injunction which prevents them from > disclosing that such blocking is taking place. Not "highly likely". It depends. Some censors are open in their censorship (otherwise, RFC 7725 would be useless.) Case study: in France, the list of "terrorist" domain names whose blocking is mandatory is not public, but the fact that a domain is blocked because of this list is not: the ISP returns a forged (sorry, "substituted") specific IP address. _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
