[dns-operations] Storm on the DNS
paul at redbarn.org
Tue Dec 8 17:19:07 UTC 2015
On Tuesday, December 08, 2015 05:04:59 PM Jim Reid wrote:
> On 8 Dec 2015, at 16:27, Paul Vixie <paul at redbarn.org> wrote:
> Your idea of an improved liability model is a good one. However it will be
> hard to come up with one that gets widespread acceptance/adoption. And even
> harder to enforce it. Good luck with an indemnity action in the North
> Korean courts (say) or expecting whatever's flavour-of-the-month bad guys
> to abide by the rule of law.
if we can push the spoofed-source problem out of the 5-I countries, then we will have other
tools available, which are not available today due to "friendly fire" problems. so, as bush the
first once said, "bring it on!"
> An improved liability model may well fail for the same "it's not my problem"
> reasons. Why take the hit of minimising your exposure to liability actions
> when your competitors aren't doing that too?
hopefully there will be lawsuits.
> One approach which might be worth trying is to reward BCP38 adopters. For
> instance, by offering them better terms at IXPs than those who don't do
> BCP38 or pulling the plug on those who can't/won't do BCP38. Though that
> approach suffers from the same externality: why should IXP A do this when
> IXP B isn't?
right. this can't work for the same reason MLPA's aren't universally used.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the dns-operations