Re: [dnssd] Should DNSSD meet at IETF 120?

Ted Lemon <> Fri, 26 April 2024 21:06 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B41F0C14F713 for <>; Fri, 26 Apr 2024 14:06:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.896
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5dp_mg4sVr0s for <>; Fri, 26 Apr 2024 14:06:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f34]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 13F6FC14CEFC for <>; Fri, 26 Apr 2024 14:06:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id 6a1803df08f44-6a04bae512aso14860216d6.2 for <>; Fri, 26 Apr 2024 14:06:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20230601; t=1714165604; x=1714770404;; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=yXGc5vAgOjjnpnq3GZakgt6Ful4ZtcNWer0/UYxWg38=; b=H6dLign9xB39pbhJLN1x6EpFzWIHGD7/2qY4kHKgTvey8O8tpmZ1yCn+X/80CgA+op Pzl/g1ZJwh9cTVs3aiHkmv8IfZ3lh5CckzjYUyuwsQeP0TMkbJl/eVmQXgtH2LrpJdGm OK1fO/mbzu9P+rmfyfj6v5UXePOzbELbz0PDMQDzHHw76VYzEKqq4zzycBRQ/jAW1l7v fJPeno713xCcLMOvGEewvNB6bNIi54DgtOH3IYuXw9vALAnwAH75ant+veHlz+gyK5zJ AzTh7kXqsmkj0RnGe/I9E0PZtC44gQDIQl22b0iaOlr6kuB4JqHZavJxkPhPTjU1lTcv lsYw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20230601; t=1714165604; x=1714770404; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=yXGc5vAgOjjnpnq3GZakgt6Ful4ZtcNWer0/UYxWg38=; b=JWJBu+zi68202KuUkmx7+3hRCfIIfteVXisAqcVSi/GPZFx871+jI17KPqGNSUPRir TSHMnni3fiQgg/4uzjv5G9oYD1tF4vUpJqoguqt5hq6jgIJCLHGkxydAYw1nwtlxgMD5 EdqJDfCZmYSxJ8GJcH6/fG5Zp8z7/VomxY9poQQiYB5loszNO11H30+2oeSKG3S8+0CY R94UqsLYT8Wioysi8iFVoOn9/mUS/UEiRjNS9s6MOSs3Lqj2xQL88KocWaHi2PZYFYZf TyGx9LgFs1elyW8s0e4KDxPSpGLhrccWOwewKVN9twsLOpwjTDikkFLtiBNQU7aaZc8K hEXQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yw5MLITuKwfqm+Qs947ukIp9HSsgSOLtLsCCPeWymBfvziyjFh9 VmJ24KLMC1k3+Crvrp7iRj6NqlT7PM7oy6rI85UINPE/b9q5IzkEb/wap2zUjXNUfhGxHQmiHz1 rg3oSV2RgUIx6knHAjJFyCUuXEp5PjVzi9srJEA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IESogossRZ5ULjelTHhs31YfvmkWseSagXg8mwQ4PI9RHqddSBqbY8BxKnuCKLrYrlkw4tnN7C98mXWq830HJ0=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:5194:b0:6a0:b91e:3994 with SMTP id kl20-20020a056214519400b006a0b91e3994mr246430qvb.25.1714165603663; Fri, 26 Apr 2024 14:06:43 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Ted Lemon <>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2024 17:06:07 -0400
Message-ID: <>
To: David Schinazi <>
Cc: DNSSD <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000e4a745061706474b"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [dnssd] Should DNSSD meet at IETF 120?
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Fri, 26 Apr 2024 21:06:49 -0000

I think so. We actually have at least four things I want to talk about:

1. A report/discussion on the EDNS(0) TSR update and implementation
2. A discussion about compressing SRP updates for constrained networks (has
suddenly become topical)
3. DNS Push additional data update (has also suddenly become topical)
4. Updated Advertising Proxy document (stretch goal)

A fifth topic that's sort of crossover between DNSSD and SNAC is automatic
centralization of SRP/DNSSD on home/SOHO networks. This has become a hot
topic for home routers and it would be nice if we had a way for home
routers to announce that they can act as centralized DNSSD servers and for
SNAC routers to take advantage of the centralized SRP/DNSSD service. This
last bit is nothing new—it's on the SNAC charter—but I've had people asking
me more urgently than had previously been the case to figure out how to do
this, so...

On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 4:50 PM David Schinazi <>

> Hi DNSSD enthusiasts,
> Planning for IETF 120 has started. The chairs are wondering whether DNSSD
> should meet at IETF 120 in Vancouver this July. Please share requests for
> agenda items (including expected durations) in response to this email. If
> there are sufficient requests, we will schedule a session. The requested
> length will also depend on the agenda requests we receive.
> Additionally, we would like to hear feedback about our session at IETF 119
> in Brisbane. As a reminder, we tried something new by having a joint
> session with SNAC. We're interested in any thoughts you might have about
> that experiment. In particular, is this something that we should consider
> repeating?
> Thanks,
> David
> _______________________________________________
> dnssd mailing list