> Il 23/02/2026 17:11 CET Ben Schwartz <[email protected]> ha > scritto: > > > To be clear: the goals of this draft cannot be met using only a registry of > error codes. The goal is to allow a resolver to inform the user about the > particular legal action (e.g. a particular lawsuit, warrant, cease-and-desist > letter, sanctions obligation, etc.) that caused the resolver to refuse a > particular query. > However, there are many other reasons for which resolver operators filter responses, ranging from security to parental controls. It would IMHO make sense if the mechanism allowed these resolvers to offer an explanatory link too, which could point to Lumen-like databases focusing on other things than legal blocking. I have not discussed this with any of them, but it does not seem impossible that blocklist providers could set up a service of this kind for the domains they add to their blocklists, though there is a problem of blocklist confidentiality that would need to be addressed. It would then be up to browsers to decide whether they trust those blocklist providers (databases) enough to show the link. Also, this would not require any particular lexicon or reason in the EDE message - only the JSON fields necessary to build the link. In fact, the "incident ID" could be pretty generic and represent a database-specific code for the filtering reason which would not require any IANA registry. The only registry necessary is the one for databases.
-- Vittorio Bertola | Head of Policy & Innovation, Open-Xchange [email protected] mailto:[email protected] Office @ Via Treviso 12, 10144 Torino, Italy
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
