mysidia at gmail.com
Fri Apr 6 15:24:24 CDT 2012
On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 1:24 PM, David Conrad <drc at virtualized.org> wrote:
> I suspect the root server operators might not like this idea very much.
If it solves other problems adequately, they might eventually just
have to learn to like it.
> Treating a symptom and ignoring the disease. See http://tools.ietf.org/html/bcp38
No. Implementation of BCP38 does have value, but the existence of
BCP38 does not
solve DNS application problems; Just looking towards BCP38 as a
solution is like attempting
to treat a disease with a theoretically effective treatment that you
can't possibly get enough
of to cure the disease due to limited supplies -- but ignoring
mitigation of the symptoms,
despite there being more readily available options for symptom mitigation.
It's similar to the idea of promoting SPF as a means of stopping
e-mail forgery, and saying
RBLs just treat the symptoms -- stop using RBLs, and get everyone to
The underlying problem is that "BCP38" is not really a "best common practice",
despite the name of the series.
It's really a "Best Uncommon Practice that really ought to be more common",
but we can't control operators and force them to make it more common.
Lots of networks don't and will not ever implement BCP38; BCP38 is not being
more widely implemented, and there's no obvious action that will
force it to change.
More information about the NANOG