Re: [dnssd] SRP: Name Conflicts Handling

[Ted Lemon <[e-mail]>]

The ptr or srv record, yes. I don’t think any is allowed outside of the question section. 

> On Jan 17, 2021, at 22:46, Kangping Dong <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> 
> Should we use one RR with ANY type (and zero rdata) for one conflicted name? Because the conflict applies to all RRs of this name.
> 
>> Or just pointing to the root?
> Sorry, I am not following. Do you mean including exactly the original RR that has name conflict?
> 
> 
> BRs,
> Kangping
> 
>> On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 10:30 PM Ted Lemon <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> How about including an additional section on the response that includes the conflicted names and rrtypes with zero length data? Or just pointing to the root?
>> 
>>>> On Jan 15, 2021, at 01:03, Kangping Dong <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Hi DNSSD enthusiasts,
>>> 
>>> For Service Registration Protocol (SRP), when a SRP server receives a registration with names
>>> that have already been taken by another client, it responds with a YXDOMAIN error code to indicate
>>> name conflicts. When the client receives such a response, it typically will re-generate a new host or
>>> service instance name and re-register with the new name.
>>> 
>>> The problem is that a typical SRP update will include one Host Description Instruction and one (or more)
>>> Service Description Instructions (zero Service Description Instruction is allowed but it is more common
>>> that the client registers the host with some service instances). Name conflicts can happen on both Host
>>> Description instruction and Service Description Instruction, but there is no description of how to tell the
>>> client which instruction includes the conflict (or both include conflicts). Currently, the client needs to re-new
>>> both host name and service instance name or re-new a single name and starts a trial-and-error process
>>> until it finally succeeds.
>>> 
>>> One solution is, the server/registry responds with the Instruction(s) which has name conflicts. For the
>>> client, it should check the RRs in the response to get the conflicting name if a YXDOMAIN response
>>> code is received. To Reduce data transported between the server & client, the server may just include
>>> one RR, but not the entire Instruction, that contains the conflicting name.
>>> 
>>> Thoughts?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> BRs,
>>> Kangping
>>>