On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 10:12 AM, Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net
wrote:
Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
On Sat, 12 Apr 2014 10:12:09 -0400, Miles Fidelman said:
It occurs to me that Yahoo's deployment of DMARC p=reject, and the
choice of several big mail operators to honor that, has created a situation not unlike a really routing table or nameserver, snafu ---
It's more like a peering war. Time for somebody to either bake a cake, or find alternate transit providers.
Aaargghhh - what a horrible, but accurate analogy. Worse probably - more like a peering war with a large broadband carrier, at the edge, where it's harder to find alternate transport.
So, if we stretch the analogy to near-breaking-point, would that make Yahoo the Comcast of the email world... or the Level3? And depending on that answer, would the community think that a similar response of petitioning the government for more oversight and control would be warranted? Or would it be just as much out of line in this case as it is in the Level3-Comcast fight? I'm genuinely curious, because for most of my 20+ years in the networking industry, I've felt like we've done a good job at internally regulating ourselves as an industry, without needing to bring in outside regulation; but now, it sometimes starts to feel like the near metastable equilibrium of the system is wobbling ever-farther from our ability to adequately control and stabilize it. Have we potentially hit the point where the 'community' (for whatever definition is appropriate) no longer has enough input or leverage to bring players back into line when they stray outside of what is considered appropriate behaviour? In spite of the peering cake having been delicious and moist (I had two pieces, it was so yummy!), that rift has never closed; Comcast is not changing their model, in spite of community outcry, and Level3 has taken the step of summoning the spectre of government intervention. Cogent seems determined to follow a similar line of reasoning with respect to interconnections ("if we think we can get money from you, we'll use our customer base as leverage; if not, we'll cry foul, and appeal to the {government, masses, media}"). Have we reached the point as a community where "rough consensus and running code" is no longer the rule by which we operate, and fear of opprobrium no longer holds any weight with operators? As an engineer, I used to be proud that I helped build and operate a system that existed and thrived under its own rules, outside the sphere of any one particular government or legal system. I looked to it as a model of how a bottoms-up planetary ecosystem might operate, with everyone cooperating towards a universal goal. Now, I'm not so sure anymore; I'm becoming a little bit worried it's more just a simple reflection of all the conflicting impulses in each of us. I don't think there's a clear right or wrong to these questions; it just seems like the simplicity and elegant optimism of the early years may have slipped away while I focused intently on what was right in front of me. [drat...i started writing that over breakfast, and then the day got busy...and here i am, finishing it up fifteen hours later, and i'm not even sure if i'm still going in the same direction with it; but i'll still toss it out, and see in which direction it floats...] Matt