DoH plugin for BIND
noel.butler at ausics.net
Sat May 2 23:42:44 UTC 2020
Dont waste your time trying to argue with that troll
google his name, he's well banned on many lists, he was moderated on
this list as well, seems he's changed his user@ to get around it. He's
been quiet for a while thought he learned his lesson, but leopards never
change their spots.
On 03/05/2020 01:11, Michael De Roover wrote:
> I'm sure that most of the list members here are aware of how net neutrality and the internet in general works - we're internet operators after all. What we're here for is ports and protocols, not policy or internet culture. On that subject, we are not policy makers. Let's leave that to politicians who studied for it. Vote some technical people in government while we're at it, but I digress.
> The DoT/DoH argument or what a mail server could be operated from is not one of policy.. well maybe mail servers are, to some extent. Perhaps there's some ISP employees here too. Those are in power to allow or disallow things on their network. But DoT/DoH certainly isn't. What are we supposed to worry about? How do we implement this new encrypted DNS. Do we piggyback off an existing port and rely on its ubiquitous allowance on the internet or do we create a new port for it, where we can make a dedicated new protocol suite?
> On 5/2/20 5:03 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
This Email, including attachments, may contain legally privileged
information, therefore remains confidential and subject to copyright
protected under international law. You may not disseminate any part of
this message without the authors express written authority to do so. If
you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender then delete
all copies of this message including attachments immediately.
Confidentiality, copyright, and legal privilege are not waived or lost
by reason of the mistaken delivery of this message.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the bind-users