On-going Internet Emergency and Domain Names

Adrian Chadd adrian at creative.net.au
Sun Apr 1 04:12:41 UTC 2007


On Sat, Mar 31, 2007, Gadi Evron wrote:
> 
> On Sat, 31 Mar 2007, Stephen Satchell wrote:
> > Gadi Evron wrote:
> > > 
> > > Amen. Really.
> > > 
> > > I'd honestly like more ideas.
> > 
> > What did IETF and ICANN say when you approached them through their 
> > public-comment channels?
> > 
> 
> ICANN is well aware of the issues through their visibility into
> operational groups, and I am far from an expert on public policy (which is
> why I mentioned we are studyign that option). ICANN has not shown any
> interest or ability to affect change in this realm. ICANN's work is
> elsewhere.
> 
> People at ICANN understand though, and I have no personal issue with any
> of them.
> 
> IETF? I never tried to contact them. Maybe others did, maybe not.
> 
> If you can help with any of these (if you believe they will affect change
> in the operational realm), we would appreciate it.

I hazard a guess and say they'll probably say similar things to the general
response on this mailing list - DNS is one of many possible attack vectors and
is most probably the wrong spot to do this.

Stop trying to fix things in the core - it won't work, honest - and start
trying to fix things closer to the edge where the actual problem is.

I view this kind of thing as an operational issue insomuch as it might
affect my network - but malware writers are botnet operators are smarter
than they once were and aren't nearly as "spray your mark everywhere as
quickly as possible" as exploits used to be.


Adrian




More information about the NANOG mailing list