"Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker(_at_)verisign(_dot_)com> wrote:
I think it is relevant to consider the deployability of DNSSEC when
we are considering the deployability of an anti-spam solution that
has a critical dependency on it.
That's a better phrasing of what I intended than I was able to come
up with.
I also think that we should take care to consider the effect that
our proposals might have on other parts of the internet infrastructure.
It is not our problem to fix the security holes in BGP, but if we
develop a protocol that creates incentives for spammers to attack BGP
we should probably bring this to people's attention so it can get fixed.
And anti-spam proposals which simply move the problem elsewhere,
without decreasing it's effects, are probably not worth the effort.
Alan DeKok.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg