By the way, if someone discovers how to trigger this issue it would be easy to use it as a DOS pseudo-botnet.
My stack of projects to do is growing at a hell of a rate and I'm not popping them off the stack fast enough.
Check out the code generation parts and modules, they are the most mature. We have HRDs (like CRDs in k8s for anything) and a scripting language between bash and Python coming out soon too.
I've checked out your repo for a look over tomorrow when I'm cough sober!
We think of net neutrality as being for carriers and ISPs, but you could see it applied to a publicly accessible DNS service too. These DNS service providers are just as much part of the core service of the Internet as anyone else. It’s not a huge leap to require that those who operate a publicly accessible DNS service are bound by the same spirit of the regulations: that the infrastructure must not discriminate based on who is using it.
It’s different to operating a discriminatory firewall. DNS is a cacheable public service with bad consequences if poisonous data ends up in the system. Fiddling with DNS like this doesn’t seem like a good idea. Too much weird and bad stuff could go wrong.
Another analogy would be to the use of encryption on amateur radio. It seems like an innocuously good idea, but the radio waves were held open in public trust for public use. If you let them be used for a different (though arguably a more useful purpose) then the resource ends up being degraded.
Also along these lines of thought [begin irony mode]: FCC fines for DNS wildcard abuse / usage.
I guess my point is that "abuse" in this sense is pretty subjective.
The difference is in whether both endpoints want the traffic, not whether (or on what basis) the enabling infrastructure wants to bear it.
Doesn't necessarily apply to this conversation, but the moral mistake that people (and societies) frequently make is underestimating the nuance that should be exercised when identifying others as abusers.