Discuss mailing list

[Jonah Aragon <jonaharagon AT gmail.com>]

As far as I'm aware you can't drop a peer because they're now all in the root zone. You don't have to *slave* them but they'd still resolve.

I was just saying we may want to reconsider it in the future, especially with the spam issues originating from .bit as of late. We need to start promoting our own democratic TLDs instead of other parties' namespaces.

RE: Stephan: I'm wondering why you had to remove the .bit zone, I suspect just disabling recursion would be sufficient, and recursion isn't necessary for Tier 1 servers so you could keep it as a full fledged T1.

Jonah

On May 18, 2017 2:21 PM, "Zach Gibbens" <zachgibbens AT zachgibbens.org> wrote:

In the past peering in opennic didn't mean both parties had to resolve each other (however that was the desire) and we knew that going in on namecoin, we did that unilaterally.

Also a tier2 server wasn't required to carry a peering tld, merely OpenNIC (ICANN was implied too, considering how we linked them at the root) so if I wanted to drop AltNations (just an example, only other peer I can think of) I could just do it myself no harm no foul.

Perhaps this has evolved over time, don't think we've updated the charter regarding it though.

This issue is actually a few issues in one if I read right. There was an open resolver issue as a part of this (which I can attest is more likely the reason for the nullroute threat, there's a reason my T2 servers are internal only now. DNS amplification attacks cost too much.)






-------- Original Message --------

On May 18, 2017, 15:05, Jonah Aragon < jonaharagon AT gmail.com> wrote:

On a minor tangent, I wonder if we should reconsider peering the Namecoin and Emercoin zones. They seem to be causing more trouble than they're worth, and we don't even seem to have a true peering agreement with us as far as I can tell, we resolve their names but not vice versa.

In my opinion we should drop their zones unless they can agree to include our zones in their official DNS clients. I have my doubts we can do this with Namecoin but perhaps we could convince Emercoin to do this as we have a bit of an official relationship with them.

Just my two cents on the whole thing.

Jonah

On May 18, 2017 1:59 PM, "Jonah Aragon" < jonaharagon AT gmail.com> wrote:

ISP's DNS servers are generally whitelisted internally (to their customer network) so they don't have to deal with stuff like that, with a few exceptions, ours on the other hand are publicly accessible to anyone.

The issue doesn't seem to be with Spamhaus necessarily here however, it seems to be with the hosting provider ns4 is using, because they'd rather block a paying customer than have an IP blacklisted by a spam organization (which may be a good trade-off for them, who knows, I have no idea how much is being paid for ns4's servers). For example if Spamhaus came after me I could easily just laugh and not pay them attention because my hosting providers aren't going to care, and I'm not going to care because being blacklisted generally doesn't come with many consequences outside of email deliverability. The provider for ns4 on the other hand was prepared to completely nullroute their network.

There's definitely an issue here with misunderstanding between us, Spamhaus, and our hosting providers, but it should be a fairly trivial task to move to a provider who won't be swayed so easily by random third party organizations.

That's how I see it at least.

Jonah

--------
You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
You may unsubscribe by emailing discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org