[DNSOP] Fwd: [dnssd] Call for adoption of draft-bellis-dnsext-multi-qtypes into DNSSD

DNSOP

DNSSD has placed a call for adoption for Ray Bellis' document on Multi
Qtypes.  Current version is here.
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-bellis-dnsext-multi-qtypes-08.html

The DNSOP chairs would like the DNSOP working group to comment on this call
for adoption.
We are aware that not everyone on this mailing list reads the dnssd mailing
list, so feel free
to make any comments, etc here.  The chairs and authors will incorporate
them.

The email does not list an explicit end date but two weeks would be
November 30, 2023

thanks
tim

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Chris Box <chris.box.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 1:08 PM
Subject: [dnssd] Call for adoption of draft-bellis-dnsext-multi-qtypes into
DNSSD
To: dnssd <dnssd@ietf.org>

Dear DNSSD folks,

This message starts a two-week adoption call for
draft-bellis-dnsext-multi-qtypes-08
<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-bellis-dnsext-multi-qtypes-08.html>,
ending at 23:59 on 30th November in any timezone. As discussed in the
Prague meeting (slides-118-dnssd-multiple-dns-questions
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/118/materials/slides-118-dnssd-multiple-dns-questions-00>)
this is proposed as a way to permit asking for multiple query types in a
single DNS query message. This would save capacity on Thread networks,
where it is common to need to ask for both SRV and TXT.

An alternative existing design is to achieve this with QDCOUNT=2, but such
a design conflicts with draft-ietf-dnsop-qdcount-is-one
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-dnsop-qdcount-is-one-01>.
That DNSOP draft describes the problems encountered when QDCOUNT>1 and
proposes to require that QDCOUNT<=1.

The chairs consider that draft-bellis-dnsext-multi-qtypes-08 is consistent
with point 2 of the DNSSD charter. Please review the draft and consider
whether you support its adoption by DNSSD. Please share any thoughts with
the list to indicate support or opposition. Note that this is not a vote.

If you are willing to provide a more in-depth review, or are willing to
consider implementing it, please state it explicitly to give the chairs an
indication of the energy level in the working group willing to work on the
document.

WG adoption is the start of the process. The fundamental question is
whether you agree the proposal is worth the WG's time to work on and
whether this draft represents a good starting point.

Thanks,

Chris (for the chairs)

_______________________________________________
dnssd mailing list
dnssd@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnssd