[72713] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: that MIT paper again (Re: VeriSign's rapid DNS updates in .com/.net ) (longish)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu)
Fri Jul 23 19:10:14 2004
To: Simon Waters <simon@wretched.demon.co.uk>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 23 Jul 2004 22:30:46 BST."
<1090618246.31328.TMDA@email.demon.co.uk>
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 19:09:39 -0400
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
--==_Exmh_-1726198662P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 22:30:46 BST, Simon Waters <simon@wretched.demon.co.uk> said:
> I think relying on accurate DNS information to distinguish spammers from
> genuine senders is at best shakey currently, the only people I can think
> would suffer with making it easier and quicker to create new domains
> would be people relying on something like SPF, but I think that just
> reveals issues with SPF, and the design flaws of SPF shouldn't influence
> how we should manage the DNS.
Ahh.. but if SPF (complete with issues and design flaws) is widely deployed, we
may not have any choice regarding whether its issues and flaws dictate the DNS
management.
Remember that we've seen this before - RFC2052 didn't specify a '_', RFC2782
does. And we all know where BIND's "delegation-only" came from....
--==_Exmh_-1726198662P
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001
iD8DBQFBAZqzcC3lWbTT17ARAt52AKDggXZ0R10nno9UJPZ4rKHn3kiD5wCgw/Wj
hV7Rhl4hLfgxHs2cLSdYGpw=
=sqWB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--==_Exmh_-1726198662P--
