Subject: [dnsop] Complaint on abuse of DNSOP lists

From: Dean Anderson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 14:17:41 -0400 (EDT)

Point of order, please

It seems that WG co-chair has begun to use an email address that is 
defaming Av8 Internet, Inc by returning business email to users of Av8 
Internet claiming that Av8 Internet has hijacked some address space.

Av8 Internet hereby demands that the IETF immediately end this behavior
and halt the defamation of Av8 Internet, Inc by IETF representatives.  
IETF representatives must use email addresses that are not configured for
defamation of Av8 Internet, Inc.

Dean Anderson
Av8 Internet, Inc

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 9 May 2004 20:17:23 -0400
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Returned mail: see transcript for details

The original message was received at Sun, 9 May 2004 20:17:14 -0400
from cirrus.av8.net [130.105.36.66]

   ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----
<[email-masked]>
    (reason: 553 Service unavailable; Client host [130.105.36.66] blocked using dnsbl.sorbs.net; Hijacked/Disused Netblock See: http://www.dnsbl.sorbs.net/cgi-bin/lookup?IP=130.105.36.66)

   ----- Transcript of session follows -----
... while talking to mx-1.isc.org.:
>>> DATA
<<< 553 Service unavailable; Client host [130.105.36.66] blocked using dnsbl.sorbs.net; Hijacked/Disused Netblock See: http://www.dnsbl.sorbs.net/cgi-bin/lookup?IP=130.105.36.66
550 5.1.1 <[email-masked]>... User unknown
<<< 554 Error: no valid recipients

Subject: Re: [dnsop] draft-ietf-dnsop-dontpublish-unreachable-03.txt
From: Dean Anderson <[email-masked]>
To: Rob Austein <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked], <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 9 May 2004 20:17:14 -0400 (EDT)

I think it is a good idea too, but I don't see why it needs an RFC.  It is
purely administrative function in a nameserver to configure it not go give
out certain data to requests from, say, certain IP ranges. The issues of
'how it works' and what features, administrative syntax, etc seem to me to
be as proprietary as the server configuration file.

Indeed, it should be easy for some nameservers (powerDNS comes to mind)  
to do this now.  But it doesn't change the protocol, it just changes the
administration and operation of the server.

		--Dean

On Fri, 7 May 2004, Rob Austein wrote:

> At Thu, 06 May 2004 17:26:34 +0900, Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote:
> > 
> > 	could you tell me what happened to
> > 	draft-ietf-dnsop-dontpublish-unreachable-03.txt?  it has been expired
> > 	for some time now.  i think it is a good document...
> 
> I thought it was useful too.  If I recall the history of this one
> correctly, it was a WG document which a number of people liked, but
> the WG ratholed discussing how many angels can dance on the word
> "unreachable", why firewalls are an offense before God, Man, and Small
> Furry Creature From Alpha Centauri, and other nonterminating topics.
> The author, not being totally out of his mind, eventually found
> something more productive to do with his time.
> 
> This document is not on the WG's current charter, because the last
> time we asked for a volunteer, the silence was deafening.  Absent
> somebody willing to work on it, there is no point in asking our ADs to
> let us put it back on the charter.
> 
> So: who cares about bringing this one back enough to work on it?
> 
> Given what happened the last time that I foolishly asserted from
> memory that an author had given up on a DNSOP WG doc, let me phrase
> this as a two part question:
> 
> a) Is the author interested in bringing back this document?  If so, he
>    of course has dibs.
> 
> b) Otherwise, is there somebody else who would be interested in
>    picking up the pen?
> .
> dnsop resources:_____________________________________________________
> web user interface: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/dnsop.html
> mhonarc archive: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/dnsop/index.html
>

---

From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 21:45:33 +0300 (EEST)

> defamation of Av8 Internet, Inc.

If you look at the message, you will note that it is a bounce from the
WG co-chair's _personal_ email address, directly to your email
address.

I'd say that everyone has the right to choose what mail to accept (or
not to accept).

You might or might not have a point if this behaviour happened on an 
IETF list, but that is not the case..

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

.

---

From: Dean Anderson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 16:10:29 -0400 (EDT)

> WG co-chair's _personal_ email address, directly to your email

Actually, it bounces this way to all Av8 Internet Customers, not just to
me.  But it was a bounce to a message Mr. Austein posted on DNSOP. It was
not private business. It was IETF business.

Further, by reviewing the archives of DNSOP, I have found that Mr.  
Austein's home address is <[email-masked]>, which he has used
exclusively for some time until March 1st of this year. He first started
using the ISC.ORG address on a message involving
draft-ietf-dnsop-inadr-required. Perhaps coincidentally, this draft is a
pet project of Mr. Austeins, and one to which I (and many others) have
raised serious objections regarding both misleading and incorrect content
and procedural irregularities.  The archives show that since March 1st,
2004, Mr.  Austein has made all his DNSOP posts from [email-masked].  

> I'd say that everyone has the right to choose what mail to accept (or

They don't when they are conducting IETF business. IETF rules require that
participants not be excluded from IETF activities. WG chairs and others
cannot refuse email from participants.

As Joe Abley revealed previously, this configuration from ISC.ORG isn't
meant to actually block spam. The idea is to make Av8 Internet users have
to seek other email addresses by which to contact them, and to obtain
opportunities to defame Av8 Internet and perhaps others and convince users
to seek other services. This is unlawful.  Besides the defamation, it
would is an illegal group boycott, and an unfair business practice.

Refusing email is one thing, though that is still not permitted for IETF
business.  Defamation by claiming addresses are hijacked is quite another
thing. This abuse of email addresses is unacceptable, and illegal, and I
can engage legal action if necessary to prevent an organization like the
IETF from permitting this abuse to continue.

Mr. Austein cannot be allowed to use the ISC.ORG address for IETF
business.

> IETF list, but that is not the case..

Actually, it is the case. This involves two IETF lists, and the conduct of
an IETF representative on the DNSOP list. My republishing of Mr. Austein's
defamation to the DNSOP and IETF list to make a complaint is a
republishment for which Mr.  Austein and the IETF are legally responsible
under US defamation tort law.

Mr Austein as a representative of the IETF defamed Av8 Internet to me, to
the customers of Av8 Internet, and to the readership of both the IETF and
DNSOP lists.  Mr. Austein is a co-chair of the IETF working group.  This
defamation came about through IETF working group business.

The IETF is responsible for the conduct of its representatives on its
lists.  It is unlawful to permit its representatives to use addresses
which are configured to defame IETF participants, and it is against the
IETF rules to refuse email from IETF participants.

Dean Anderson
President
Av8 Internet, Inc

.