[122410] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: dns interceptors
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Larry Sheldon)
Sun Feb 14 12:56:24 2010
Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 11:54:25 -0600
From: Larry Sheldon <LarrySheldon@cox.net>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <25869BF9-2879-46F0-9D67-38AEC742A40B@ianai.net>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 2/14/2010 11:42 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
> On Feb 14, 2010, at 12:37 PM, Jason Frisvold wrote:
>> On Feb 13, 2010, at 4:58 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
>>> i am often on funky networks in funky places. e.g. the wireless in
>>> changi really sucked friday night. if i ssh tunneled, it would multiply
>>> the suckiness as tcp would have puked at the loss rate.
>>
>> You can always run your own local resolver... Or is there a reason that's unacceptable?
>
> How does that help? It still sends port 53 requests to the authorities, which will be intercepted.
I don't have access to a trustable network to tunnel to. (Or at least I
don't know how to.)
I wish some enteprenure would start a subscription service to provide
honest DNS (and maybe authenticatrd outbound email) that I could point
to regardless of to where I may have wandered.
--
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to
take everything you have."
Remember: The Ark was built by amateurs, the Titanic by professionals.
Requiescas in pace o email
Ex turpi causa non oritur actio
Eppure si rinfresca
ICBM Targeting Information: http://tinyurl.com/4sqczs
http://tinyurl.com/7tp8ml
