[OCCAID] Proposal for EINTAP

[Tristan Santore]

Miles Nordin wrote:

>>>>>>"tm" == Tom McNeely <tom at cnacs.occaid.org> writes:
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>
>    tm> http://www.occaid.org/proposals/eintap.txt
>
>dnsspam?!
>
>It seems odd for an experimental network to have formal disciplinary
>procedures for a behavior that does no harm to others just because
>some people think it's unfashionable or juvenile.  Such procedures
>don't create a climate conducive to experimenting.  In my opinion
>members should be encouraged to do things with no practical value, and
>certainly shouldn't be ``disciplined'' for doing something harmless
>just because many people think it looks dumb.
>
>I don't have any so-called ``DNS spam'' in my network right now, but I
>do have one guy that set his IPv6 address to ::dead:beef:dead:beef or
>something.  Next will that be forbidden too because someone thinks
>it's unfashionable or childish, or because ``IPv6 addresses were
>intended as opaque numerals for routing purposes only and were never
>meant to spell things''?
>
>newsgroups like alt.wesley.crusher.die.die.die were tolerated even
>though they actually caused some extra disk seeks on the news server.
>Sysadmins bitched about it, but no reasonable person filtered out
>those groups or tried to ``discipline'' the creators.  By comparison,
>dnsspam is just stupid-looking and harmless.
>
>The strict prohibition and dispute procedure for so-called DNS spam
>strikes me as a pet vendetta more ridiculous than the practice it was
>meant to stop.  I'm sorry if I'm stepping on someone's toes here, but
>I acutally find the attitude pretty disturbing and dangerous.  And
>this opinion is coming from someone who agrees long domain names that
>spell things are stupid and who doesn't do it.
>  
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>OCCAID Mailing List: http://www.occaid.org
>schednetisr(NETISR_COFFEE); inq=&coffeebreak_intrq;
>
>Occaid at cnacs.occaid.org is the list posting address.
>db-admin at cnacs.occaid.org is the human contact address.
>See below URL for subscribe/unsubscribe and list options:
>http://mailman.twdx.net/mailman/listinfo/occaid
>  
>
Hi everybody,

ater doing some testing with spamcalc I must strongly say that I fully 
agree with Miles oppinion on that issue. I do use a longer hostname 
myself...and yes i do use it on irc, which is prolly the main reason why 
people use hostnames like e.g. my.oppinion.is.me.uk could be one. Which 
is classed as dns spam. Saying that though i do not use ridiculous dns 
names. But in my oppinion I dont see how people would be bothered by a 
longer than usual dns name. I mean you would not see that dns name 
unless u were looking at peoples hostmasks. Also I dont see that the 
overhead would be that much higher, but please correct me if I am wrong. 
Its a bit odd how it decides on if something is dns spam or not anyway.

Only a short while ago governments in Europe were discussing (still are) 
if isp's should keep logs of peoples surfing habits, so that these could 
be used for criminal investigations etc.

Lets ask ourselves, if we start to regulate the internet in certain 
ways, wont we destroy the whole idea of it ? People are not causing a 
nuisance really by using a longer dns name. People who exploit ipv6 and 
their tunnel for DOS attacks or other malicious activity deserve to be 
disciplined, because they are actively causing a nuisance and more work 
for others.

Kind regards,

Tristan