On Nov 10, 2023, at 21:02, John Levine <jo...@taugh.com> wrote: > >> >> A bit misleading subject :P > > It seems to have done the trick.
You need to trick people with exaggerations to read your emails? The industry term for that is “clickbait”. I urge everyone not to engage in that in the IETF. > > DNSBLs have been around a lot longer than QNAME minimization. They > work(ed) fine without minimization and I don't think it is reasonable > to expect every mail system in the world to change their configuration > to work around our performance bug. It is totally reasonable for protocols and software and configurations to need adapting over time. Especially in light of privacy and security concerns. Also, RBL feeds come and go. You can’t install a mail server and never do anything to keep it functional. I know, because I’ve been doing that for 30 years myself. Write a draft and we have something to discuss. Meanwhile, stop saying query minimalization is bad. It has been a tremendous privacy fix that TLDs don’t get to see all FQDN queries of all their children all the time. Paul _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
