[dns-operations] getting closure on dnscap option set

David Ulevitch davidu at everydns.net
Mon Sep 24 19:54:52 UTC 2007

Joe Abley wrote:
> On 24-Sep-2007, at 1418, David Ulevitch wrote:
>> Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
>>> On Fri, Sep 21, 2007 at 01:53:50PM -0700,
>>>  David Ulevitch <davidu at everydns.net> wrote
>>>  a message of 17 lines which said:
>>>> In more important news:
>>>> http://www.radialmonster.com/blog/archives/2007/09/18/163/
>>> Don't worry, RFC 4924 has only been issued two months ago. Once
>>> everybody have read it (and specially its section 2.5.2), things will
>>> improve :-{
>> Why do you think that they will improve?
> Because it's rude to give people answers unexpectedly to questions they 
> didn't ask, and a reduction in rudeness ought to yield improvement (at 
> least for most people :-)
> I think it's defensible to give people answers to questions they didn't 
> ask if they are forewarned that such things might happen, i.e. if they 
> opt in to such behaviour. That doesn't seem to be the situation with the 
> anecdote quoted above.

Joe, I agree with what you say completely.  My question was not directed 
at the RFC itself, but what the presence of that RFC will do to improve 

In other words, why would the issuance of RFC 4924 do anything to cause 
change (and improve) the state of transparency in ISP networks 
(especially those delivered to "end-users")?  As Stephane points out, it 


More information about the dns-operations mailing list