discuss AT lists.opennicproject.org
Subject: Discuss mailing list
List archive
- From: Larry Brower <larry AT maxqe.com>
- To: discuss AT lists.opennicproject.org
- Subject: Re: [opennic-discuss] Idea for 'protected' domains
- Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2011 16:51:31 -0600
- List-archive: <http://lists.darkdna.net/pipermail/discuss>
- List-id: <discuss.lists.opennicproject.org>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
On 03/06/2011 02:31 PM, Peter McCann wrote:
> What is OpenNICs strategy with respect to DNSSEC? I assume that eventually
> the OpenNIC root will need to be signed with some key and some group of
> people
> will need to be responsible for that.
>
We would also need the DS records for all of the signed TLD's / Zones we
plan on providing resolution for which seems like it will be more work
then benefit. Another question, how do we plan on dealing with ISP's who
intercept DNS packets and send back spoofed answers? Comcast for
instance has been caught doing this and they aren't being told to
block/restrict access like some other countries. How do we plan on
supporting people in countries who put up firewalls for all outbound
traffic like China? How do we plan on dealing with pressure from US
.gov? The idea seems nice but I think it may be harder to implement then
people think, both technically and politically. It is true that DHS
hasnt started legal proceedings in a lot of cases recently but just the
fact that they have a signed warrent saying they can confiscate the
domains is enough for them to go after any US presence of OpenNIC for
things like interfering with a gov investigation, etc... We can argue
all day long that the warrent is bad but the fact of the matter is we
are not attorneys and it is signed by a judge. The only way to dispute
it is in a court. plain and simple.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJNdA/zAAoJEBgaXYoZ++87xjIIAJ2dMsXBHyJL6nslZIAJrHK6
XXJz2MpoQ9R/JcxT0EZiPwSWpPEtJgeukdbNA03vzDeQN1Fy3GQA4oOkBVZKv7/d
3ABjdyTqChAfMgESnj5j+q/S82Yufyq/O65X45buWBDNpreQFasO0Uv90fo/nkBd
D15Xi7Hwm0R9NeTZRabKsgaPKm/8DUg9LMkhPaodOXpCeLfkdXO27k36IBL2Bn4I
/of2JTf+aDEFw1IWom62IWKRbK+RXRgVaYcPJTHHnNMQaso0eVmIWtYZD5Obme4N
5DWVWr2uRHKX7ymm/yJUao3XmCatS1SuYz5Dto9fM/EFKV24/L/b/Nb1EK6UBlQ=
=q2Zt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- [opennic-discuss] Idea for 'protected' domains, Jeff Taylor, 03/06/2011
- Re: [opennic-discuss] Idea for 'protected' domains, Richard Lyons, 03/06/2011
- Re: [opennic-discuss] Idea for 'protected' domains, Jeff Taylor, 03/06/2011
- Re: [opennic-discuss] Idea for 'protected' domains, Zach Gibbens, 03/06/2011
- Re: [opennic-discuss] Idea for 'protected' domains, Jeff Taylor, 03/06/2011
- Re: [opennic-discuss] Idea for 'protected' domains, Jeff Taylor, 03/06/2011
- Re: [opennic-discuss] Idea for 'protected' domains, Peter McCann, 03/06/2011
- Re: [opennic-discuss] Idea for 'protected' domains, Jeff Taylor, 03/06/2011
- Re: [opennic-discuss] Idea for 'protected' domains, Larry Brower, 03/06/2011
- Re: [opennic-discuss] Idea for 'protected' domains, Jeff Taylor, 03/06/2011
- Re: [opennic-discuss] Idea for 'protected' domains, Peter McCann, 03/06/2011
- Re: [opennic-discuss] Idea for 'protected' domains, Richard Lyons, 03/06/2011
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19.