Top
Best
New

Posted by farrokhi 18 hours ago

Quad9 to exit France(quad9.net)
1178 points | 396 commentspage 3
trentor 17 hours ago|
Crazy. A company that actually exits the market they threatened to leave. Meta and Twitter should take note.
ghusto 13 hours ago||
We've all seen this sort of thing many times before, but I still don't understand how it works.

I transmit a radio signal in Dover that can be picked up by radios in Calais, the message it carries happens to be illegal in France ("Brittany is still part of the UK", say). Could I be taken to court in France? I'm guessing no.

declan_roberts 17 hours ago||
Europe needs to strengthen its free speech protections. It turns out, even though the US founders had no idea what DNS was, they still created the right framework to protect it.
akimbostrawman 29 seconds ago||
>Europe needs to strengthen its free speech protections

Europe does not have free speech in the first place.

AndroTux 17 hours ago|||
As long as you don’t say Artificial Intelligence instead of Super Intelligence, you’re all good.
asdff 13 hours ago|||
US just pushes the enforcement mechanisms to private companies not so hamstrung by legalese. E.g. try and torrent all you want. After all, all you are really doing observably is connecting to various IPs, essentially no different than browsing websites. But you might get a letter in the mail not from the government, but from the ISP threatening legal action against you, solely because their systems saw your IP connected to another.
tensor 11 hours ago||
These days you can land in jail for simply bad mouthing the government. US needs to strengthen its adherence to their constitutions. Words on paper are useless if they aren't followed.
bubblethink 5 hours ago||
Why is everybody (in the government) in the EU so illiterate? Do they not understand that their economies are dead and football streaming isn't going to save them.
dgellow 12 minutes ago|
It’s a judge. Nothing to do with the government or the EU. You have stupid tech illiterate judgements in the US all the time
ghm2199 11 hours ago||
Noob question: Isn't there like a panel of existing case law or amicus-briefs that would speak to the logical and historical stupidity of arguments by the plaintiffs? I mean this is like blaming airbus for hijackings.
chaboud 13 hours ago||
I'm super confused as to what it means to withdraw for French users if geoIP doesn't work.

So remove 9.9.9.9 BGP announcements? Unless France wants to build a great firewall... a Ligne Maginot du DNS, I don't see how this is enforceable. The internet is not Minitel...

whh 16 hours ago||
> The plaintiff (Sony Music Entertainment GmbH) then used a VPN to access the blocked content from Germany in circumvention of the geoIP blocking. The court agreed with Sony in their assertions of noncompliance, and we were fined for contempt of court.

I knew courts were dumb, but didn't think they were this dumb.

"The neighbour's dog bit me, so they put up a fence. I climbed over it and got bitten again. The fence doesn't count."

dev_l1x_be 14 hours ago||
The internet is a distributed system, they said.
Qiu_Zhanxuan 14 hours ago||
Genuinely baffled by the incompetence (or ill-intent, corruption?) demonstrated by our courts, did they do it at behest of Qatar ? Another stain on our country's reputation but they don't care.
xyst 14 hours ago|
> demonstrated by our courts, did they do it at behest of Qatar

Honestly, this is a possibility.

beIN, like any Qatar based company, is majority owned by the state. Qatar is infamously rich in oil with the state able to subsidize luxury lifestyles for citizens it deems worthy.

France needs oil, like any other country. So if a journalist could follow the money. Could probably find where the pressure was applied within the government.

The rich using archaic copyright laws to get their way has been modus operandi for quite awhile. Seen this applied both in USA and abroad.

ButlerianJihad 7 minutes ago||
So it is no secret that Dodi Fayed and his family were prominent Egyptians, but I recently discovered that a memorial to Dodi and Princess Diana, Innocent Victims is displayed prominently in a Harrods department store. Harrods itself is owned by the Qatari sovereign wealth fund; in other words, Qatar owns the Harrods chain of department stores.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrods

And by contrast, Selfridges (among other chains) is owned jointly by a Thai conglomerate and the Saudi Arabian sovereign wealth fund.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selfridges_Group

gumby 18 hours ago|
Why does it matter that it’s a recursive resolver? They mention this a lot but it seems like the decision would just as much apply to a non-recursive resolver.

I didn’t attempt find the ruling; perhaps the lawsuit was written in an odd way.

ButlerianJihad 17 hours ago|
It is difficult to envision a "non-recursive DNS resolver" in public service. Recursion is the usual and customary way that DNS names are resolved by the leaf servers, because they are not authoritative for much of anything.

The most common configuration for non-recursive DNS servers is with forwarders. The DNS server accepts queries and simply forwards all of them upstream to another resolver, which... makes its own recursive queries.

It is simply not feasible to avoid having recursive resolvers in the chain of lookups. That's how things work with DNS.

gumby 17 hours ago||
We used to just leave that responsibility to the querying host’s own resolver. I don’t fetishize the end-to-end principle (though I come close) so I suppose a recursive resolver service could be a sort of optimization (plenty of ppl look up, say, gmail.google.com so why not cache it).

In any case, if all resolvers these days are recursive why mention it?

I know this is far from the most important question on the topic of this thread!

toast0 17 hours ago||
> We used to just leave that responsibility to the querying host’s own resolver.

When? I didn't get online until the 90s, but resolv.conf delegating recursion to some other node was the way of the world back then. And still is. Some people do run a recursive resolver locally, but it's not so common afaik.

> In any case, if all resolvers these days are recursive why mention it?

Quad9 is named as a recursive resolver in contrast to being an authoritative server. Quad9 and the server I run for my domain are both DNS servers, both provide name resolution, but one is recursive and the other isn't. Used to be, you might run one server for both jobs, but that fell out of fashion for good reasons.

SoftTalker 15 hours ago|||
You'd have to go back to the 1980s I think, when systems were still using /etc/hosts and if the host you wanted to talk to wasn't listed there you'd have to use its IP address directly.

IIRC there were some trusted lists of "well known" hosts that were passed around between administrators. DNS was invented because that obviously became impractical quickly as the internet grew.

lokar 16 hours ago|||
Back then most computing was done in office, lab, university settings. Running recursive resolvers for the local network was part of the standard IT setup.
toast0 16 hours ago|||
While I agree it was common, running a centralized recursive resolver for the local network is not the same as "leave that responsibility to the querying host’s own resolver"
lokar 16 hours ago||
Sure, but it goes with a more centralized approach to systems management in general. The attitude was often that all of the computers were one thing.
More comments...