[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Contactability

[John Bambenek]

The problem here is that you seem to assume it's just ok for you to
impost costs on us and society because you don't think the problems
matter. It isn't that some issues would be harder to solve, it's that
likely they won't get solved.

But here is what I envision... when I see problems with domains that I
can't contact, I will automate reports to the registry and the ISP. Once
a certain threshhold of their non-responsiveness is achieved, I won't
just block the domains, I will block everything from that registry or
ISP whole and entire.

It's been aptly said that these issues "aren't your job". Well, I'm
going to find the providers most in use by miscreants, and instead of
going after the miscreants, I'm just going to start assessing internet
death penalties because billions of dollars of fraud losses, human
trafficking, child sexual abuse and all the various genres of crime that
need responding to online will be handled, and if that means taking the
ban hammer to organizations that enable them, so be it.

I'm happy to deal with the miscreants direct. But if I can't, I'm going
to deal with the organization that is:

- In a direct financial relationship with the miscreant

- Enabling their criminal activity

- In the way of me identifying the miscreant

That's the world you are creating.


On 11/28/2017 11:43 AM, Volker Greimann wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> re:hotbed I was rather intending to ask whether there is a direct
> correllation between TLDs with redacted whois and issues that go
> unresolved. So do you have more unresolved issues in .co.uk than in
> .com (if numbers are normalized for registered domain names).
>
> I am sure no one would consider blocking the entire mail traffic
> originating from the United Kingdom Top Level Domain just because you
> cannot resolve some issues in a few domains, correct?
>
> So if everyone followed their (or a similar) model, the internet would
> not break. Some issues would get harder to solve (or take longer). I
> am asking because that is what most likely will happen on May 25 or
> sooner.
>
> Volker
>
>
> Am 28.11.2017 um 18:27 schrieb Andrew Sullivan:
>> On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 04:31:56PM +0100, Volker Greimann wrote:
>>> case of internet operability issues. While I appreciate that there
>>> can be
>>> issues that would necessitate the ability to quickly contact whoever
>>> can fix
>>> the issue, I wonder how this problem is solved in TLDs where whois is
>>> already redacted.
>> It's not.  In that case, if I am the one who has this experience and I
>> can't reach the target, then the problem goes unresolved.  In mail
>> cases, as John suggests elsewhere in this thread, the answer is very
>> likely that mail is blocked.  People seem surprised these days that
>> mail is so fragile, but this sort of thing is part of the reason.
>>
>>> So how does it work there? Are these TLDs hotbeds of DNS issues and
>>> unresolved problems?
>> I don't know what you mean by "hotbed", or whether that is intended to
>> be dismissive.  Some TLDs defintely have more DNS problems than
>> others.  Given how hard the DNS works to make connections happen even
>> when things are badly misconfigured, lots of stuff will work to some
>> extent even when it is badly configured.  But DNS operations people
>> trade stories about problems amongst themselves, after giving up on
>> sites because whois can't help and the mname in the SOA record is
>> broken.  I find this happens more often than you might expect.
>>
>> But yes, there are broken domains on the Internet.  I find it hard to
>> believe that would be even slightly remarkable.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> A
>>
>