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

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

------------=_1562843825-18973-1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

If every server has its own secret blacklist, OpenNIC would be broken and i=
nconsistent. There is no way to tell whether microsoft.com actually isn't w=
orking or if the server owner is just being moralistic.

--

-Dan Q


On Thu, 11 Jul 2019 00:00:50 -0600, 'smee <[email protected]> w=
rote:

> Of course it makes sense for network admins anywhere to block sites or
> domains based on various possible criteria, but that is a totally
> different thing than a dns provider (especially one with 'open' in it's
> name) implementing a censorship program.=20
>=20
> I don't like malware distributors or other bad players any better than
> anyone else. But if we're blocking malware, a solid case could be made
> for blocking microsoft, google, etc. Who makes the decision what to
> block, and where does it stop?
>=20
> Personally on my own network, where these decisions should be made, I
> choose who to trust and who not to trust, and I configure my firewall
> and dns settings accordingly.
>=20=20
>=20
> On Sun, 2019-06-30 at 20:39 -0400, Rouben wrote:
> > University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Not sure if Net Neutrality is
> > mandated in Canada, but I=E2=80=99d like to think that it=E2=80=99s a f=
airly liberal
> > country. I know for a fact that our central IT group filters domains
> > of
> > sites (entire zones) that host phishing sites targeting the
> > University's
> > authentication infrastructure. Alternatively they block outgoing
> > traffic to
> > such hosts by IP at the edge. That=E2=80=99s just one example and common
> > practice.
> > Here=E2=80=99s a more comprehensive list (specifics require University
> > credentials
> > - UTORid- to access).
> >=20
> > On Sun, Jun 30, 2019 at 20:17 Daniel Quintiliani <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >=20
> > > Even in countries which mandate net neutrality?
> > >=20
> > > --
> > >=20
> > > -Dan Q
> > >=20
> > >=20
> > > On Sun, 30 Jun 2019 17:07:51 -0700, <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >=20
> > > > I think you're wrong about that. A quick google and
> > > > you'll see that DNS filtering is actually quite common.
> > > >=20
> > > > ~ Ole
> > > >=20
> > > >=20
> > > > On Sun, 30 Jun 2019 18:56:32 -0400 (EDT)
> > > > "Daniel Quintiliani" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >=20
> > > > > No ISP in the free world does this with their DNS
> > > > > servers. Why should we?
> > > > >=20
> > > > > --
> > > > >=20
> > > > > -Dan Q
> > > > >=20
> > > > >=20
> > > > > On Sun, 30 Jun 2019 15:58:11 -0500, kevin
> > > > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > >=20
> > > > > > The problem here was, spamhaus painted ALL opennic
> > > > > > peers with a broad brush.=C2=A0=C2=A0So 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...=C2=A0=C2=A0and so to repeat, those that filter nothing
> > > > > > (including malware) could affect all of us.=C2=A0=C2=A0And like
> > > > > > the .free domain, I don't care and would have preferred
> > > > > > to keep it under openNIC.=C2=A0=C2=A0But, not everyone agrees
> > > > > > with what I think. lol=C2=A0=C2=A0So filtering, at least for
> > > > > > malware, certainly could be suggested as a strong
> > > > > > guideline or recommendation. 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
> > > > > > > much anything. Some T2 server providers may choose to
> > > > > > > run more blacklists, some may choose to run none.
> > > > > > > That's their decision and as
> > > > > > > long as they say so in their server's description
> > > > > > > then more power to everyone - the whole point of
> > > > > > > sharing T2 servers is to provide a service
> > > > > > > to other users who have an interest in that service
> > > > > > > *with that particular configuration*. Same goes for
> > > > > > > logging and such.
> > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > Sure, don't show it on the homepage among
> > > > > > > "recommended servers" but there's no reason to
> > > > > > > essentially blacklist those servers and operators
> > > > > > > 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.=C2=A0=C2=A0And I'm not saying
> > > > > > > > > we WILL, I'm just saying we COULD have that
> > > > > > > > > option.=C2=A0=C2=A0Like with the
> > > > > > > > > spamhaus listings, use of this would be up to the
> > > > > > > > > individual T2 operators.=C2=A0=C2=A0At the moment there is
> > > > > > > > > nothing planned, I just wrote the
> > > > > > > > > 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
> > > > > > > > private T2 servers.=C2=A0=C2=A0In other words, T2 servers
> > > > > > > > using blacklists for
> > > > > > > > any category other than malware would not be
> > > > > > > > eligible to be listed in
> > > > > > > > the public directory.
> > > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > > We might even want to require public T2 servers to
> > > > > > > > blacklist known malware domains, but that is sure
> > > > > > > > to be highly controversial. Should
> > > > > > > > we censor ransomware?
> > > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > > -- Jacob
> > > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > > --------
> > > > > > > > You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
> > > > > > > > You may unsubscribe by emailing
> > > > > > > > [email protected]
> > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > --------
> > > > > > > You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
> > > > > > > You may unsubscribe by emailing
> > > > > > > [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.
> > > > > > You may unsubscribe by emailing
> > > > > > [email protected]
> > > > >=20
> > > > >=20
> > > >=20
> > > >=20
> > > > --------
> > > > You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
> > > > You may unsubscribe by emailing
> > >=20
> > > [email protected]
> > >=20
> > >=20
> > >=20
> > >=20
> > > --------
> > > You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
> > > You may unsubscribe by emailing
> > > [email protected]
> > >=20
> >=20
> > --------
> > You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.=C2=A0
> > You may unsubscribe by emailing [email protected]
> > ect.org
>=20
>=20
> --------
> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.=20
> You may unsubscribe by emailing [email protected].=
org



------------=_1562843825-18973-1
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]

------------=_1562843825-18973-1--