Re: [opennic-discuss] Vote to keep or drop peering with NameCoin

This is a multi-part message in MIME format...

------------=_1561935395-3952-51
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

No ISP in the free world does this with their DNS servers. Why should we?

--

-Dan Q


On Sun, 30 Jun 2019 15:58:11 -0500, kevin <[email protected]> wrote:

> The problem here was, spamhaus painted ALL opennic peers with a broad
> brush.  So those that won't filter anything, which I fully support,
> could potentially affect everyone.
>=20
> As many, if not most of us here appear to believe, this project has
> always been about freedom with collaboration via a touch of democracy
> (voting) thrown in. And I believe that everyone can (and will) do as
> they please.
>=20
> But...  and so to repeat, those that filter nothing (including malware)
> could affect all of us.  And like the .free domain, I don't care and
> would have preferred to keep it under openNIC.  But, not everyone
> agrees with what I think. lol  So filtering, at least for malware,
> certainly could be suggested as a strong guideline or recommendation.=20
> And my opinion with anything else, obviously leave that to the
> individual T2 hosts.
>=20
> Kevin
>=20
> On Sun, 2019-06-30 at 12:05 +0200, Amunak wrote:
> > Why? The T2 server list is capable of displaying and filtering
> > pretty=20
> > much anything. Some T2 server providers may choose to run more=20
> > blacklists, some may choose to run none. That's their decision and
> > as=20
> > long as they say so in their server's description then more power to=20
> > everyone - the whole point of sharing T2 servers is to provide a
> > service=20
> > to other users who have an interest in that service *with that=20
> > particular configuration*. Same goes for logging and such.
> >=20
> > Sure, don't show it on the homepage among "recommended servers" but=20
> > there's no reason to essentially blacklist those servers and
> > operators=20
> > from OpenNic.
> >=20
> > Amunak
> >=20
> > On 30.06.2019 1:55, Jacob Bachmeyer wrote:
> > > Jeff Taylor wrote:
> > > > It could relate to any domains, opennic or icann.  And I'm not
> > > > saying=20
> > > > we WILL, I'm just saying we COULD have that option.  Like with
> > > > the=20
> > > > spamhaus listings, use of this would be up to the individual T2=20
> > > > operators.  At the moment there is nothing planned, I just wrote
> > > > the=20
> > > > API so we could expand on its use later if we chose to.
> > >=20
> > > I suggest a policy restricting the use of non-malware blacklists
> > > to=20
> > > private T2 servers.  In other words, T2 servers using blacklists
> > > for=20
> > > any category other than malware would not be eligible to be listed
> > > in=20
> > > the public directory.
> > >=20
> > > We might even want to require public T2 servers to blacklist known=20
> > > malware domains, but that is sure to be highly controversial.
> > > Should=20
> > > we censor ransomware?
> > >=20
> > >=20
> > > -- Jacob
> > >=20
> > >=20
> > >=20
> > > --------
> > > You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
> > > You may unsubscribe by emailing=20
> > > [email protected]
> >=20
> > --------
> > You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.=20
> > You may unsubscribe by emailing=20
> > [email protected]
> --=20
> http://ca.linkedin.com/in/kevinrattai/
>=20
> https://winnipegcryptoconference.com/
>=20
> https://github.com/krattai
>=20
>=20
> --------
> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.=20
> You may unsubscribe by emailing [email protected].=
org



------------=_1561935395-3952-51
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit



--------
You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list. 
You may unsubscribe by emailing [email protected]

------------=_1561935395-3952-51--