Groups > comp.protocols.dns.bind > #15702

Re: DoH plugin for BIND

From	Paul Kosinski <bind@iment.com>
Newsgroups	comp.protocols.dns.bind
Subject	Re: DoH plugin for BIND
Date	2020-05-02 09:30 -0400
Organization	InterMedia Enterprises
Message-ID	<mailman.325.1588426229.942.bind-users@lists.isc.org> (permalink)
References	(3 earlier) <alpine.DEB.2.20.2004292100400.16665@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk> <8670427D-C5E5-42E3-AFEB-BA15F74E5F53@kreme.com> <39825fcf-bcd7-f38a-aeae-2fccc8df0be8@nixmagic.com> <002174a6-4025-fad1-afea-0e96f40d2ff0@thelounge.net> <20200502093032.09f4b5cf@ime1.iment.local>

Show all headers | View raw

How many ISPs allow traffic on port 25? My impression is that even many
(non-enterprise) business customers can't use port 25.


On Sat, 2 May 2020 09:28:54 +0200
Reindl Harald <h.reindl@thelounge.net> wrote:

> Am 02.05.20 um 09:00 schrieb Michael De Roover:
> > That's actually my biggest concern with DoH, ISP blocking. It doesn't
> > seem as obvious as it is with DoT, but deep packet inspection (DPI) is
> > already a thing. Don't expect an ISP that wants to block DoT to not
> > (want to) block DoH either. The crux of the problem at that point is not
> > the technology, it is the ISP's incentives. If the ISP wants to block
> > DoT for whatever reason, personally I'd consider it.. not exactly fine
> > but at least their right to do so. That's their decision to make.   
> 
> seriously?
> 
> that seems to be some US attitude, no wonder what happens there with
> user attitudes like "but at least their right to do so"
> 
> the ISP by definition has exactly one right: get money for his service
> which is described as "route and transfer every package, don't look at
> it, don't mangle it, you have no business about the content of my traffic"

Back to comp.protocols.dns.bind | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: DoH plugin for BIND Paul Kosinski <bind@iment.com> - 2020-05-02 09:30 -0400

csiph-web