Re: [dnssd] WG participation (or lack there of)

Olafur Gudmundsson <> Sat, 01 June 2019 00:33 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8DEC1200F8 for <>; Fri, 31 May 2019 17:33:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NO_DNS_FOR_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id k5JZEv3oblb5 for <>; Fri, 31 May 2019 17:33:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5618D12004D for <>; Fri, 31 May 2019 17:33:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by (Authenticated sender: with ESMTPSA id 5B35D601FC; Fri, 31 May 2019 20:33:25 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from olafurs-air.fios-router.home ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384) by (trex/5.7.12); Fri, 31 May 2019 20:33:25 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
From: Olafur Gudmundsson <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Fri, 31 May 2019 20:33:24 -0400
Cc: DNSSD <>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <>
To: Tom Pusateri <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [dnssd] WG participation (or lack there of)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of extensions to DNS-based service discovery for routed networks." <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 01 Jun 2019 00:33:28 -0000

> On May 30, 2019, at 11:12 AM, Tom Pusateri <> wrote:
> 	I’m struggling with the apparent lack of interest in the work performed by this WG. The original mandate based on the EDUCAUSE request seemed to show that we were working on a problem that needed an interoperable solution.
> However, as time has gone by, we have seen little feedback from the educational community and a general lack of participation from the working group.
> Several calls for participation have ended in no response and I wonder if we’re still solving a problem that people have.
> Vendors have introduced work-arounds in switches, access points, and even bluetooth pairings.
> I think it is worth considering if we’re solving a problem worth solving.
> Therefore, I am considering suspending my work in this working group and am of the opinion that the wg should consider shutting down.
> If you object to the WG shutting down, then respond as such and include how you’re willing to contribute in the next few months. 
> There is still some interesting security work going on but that may be better served in a security working group where there is cryptographic expertise.
> In a lively WG, we would have feedback from people who have previously deployed the technology, vendors who have implemented the new technology, and DNS experts that would guide the use of the protocol. We would have multiple interoperable implementations and feedback from those implementations.
> Thanks,
> Tom
> _______________________________________________
> dnssd mailing list


I think you are right and with only 2 people interested in the work it is time to close the WG