Re: [dnssd] WGLC on draft-ietf-dnssd-privacy-01

Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com> Fri, 07 July 2017 18:52 UTC

Return-Path: <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
X-Original-To: dnssd@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnssd@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F299912EC4B for <dnssd@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 11:52:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=yitter.info header.b=NmL7jZLJ; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=yitter.info header.b=VpKioJWu
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fKApxTk_Wrjf for <dnssd@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 11:52:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx4.yitter.info (mx4.yitter.info [159.203.56.111]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B0FA126C83 for <dnssd@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 11:52:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx4.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0C35C0354 for <dnssd@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 18:52:10 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yitter.info; s=default; t=1499453530; bh=AxNsNwAHPK9n7cQ/xzjekGWmTMDBDTnVwwWIzk4lkEA=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=NmL7jZLJHD/AgdMuzQO24DPWTYYpgQEKDqGXxl02cgycqzK/rTJGftVPUUIaEie2O KisSJ4KLMDSjCF/fOWrCYO4+iJmtzPoMTve+SkV346DEd8X4NKB/88m7eklUimwR8x FpLkbY3RUx7qh3VvyK+/ozJV3bmT9L1FrWvSIPBU=
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at crankycanuck.ca
Received: from mx4.yitter.info ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mx4.yitter.info [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3BiADouzjvuP for <dnssd@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 18:52:09 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2017 14:52:08 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yitter.info; s=default; t=1499453529; bh=AxNsNwAHPK9n7cQ/xzjekGWmTMDBDTnVwwWIzk4lkEA=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=VpKioJWuGA8odGpq+J3qqVO4POx2cdvhR1mWLfcUS/3DUucyhGxOXeOQgeEe2k5mS lfR2rhnX6Q3AE4me8CuQ4ZJWPNMxuh7aw1Kvb3Z6mU8FKTUQWVgFWcEe/wroidMNZk 5kgDkEDWNHn8UGNBYN3NIQlv6dgIjXaEVpFoqCjI=
From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
To: dnssd@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20170707185208.gmwm7d543nkst4je@mx4.yitter.info>
References: <CF1BAEAE-41C7-4E69-AD6F-9F31E7C7B2A3@jisc.ac.uk> <20170625210709.GA829@sources.org> <28c0ad99-2905-64b6-52c2-a357e7fa6d12@huitema.net> <20170626184107.GA8291@sources.org> <f43abe80-780d-8ae6-26f6-068539d943c4@huitema.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <f43abe80-780d-8ae6-26f6-068539d943c4@huitema.net>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnssd/QWte0qRiJIF7184ChxaK4fCN-_c>
Subject: Re: [dnssd] WGLC on draft-ietf-dnssd-privacy-01
X-BeenThere: dnssd@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of extensions to DNS-based service discovery for routed networks." <dnssd.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnssd>, <mailto:dnssd-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnssd/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnssd@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnssd-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnssd>, <mailto:dnssd-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2017 18:52:14 -0000

On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 04:07:22PM -0700, Christian Huitema wrote:
> In fact there is a solution, which I implemented in my tests. Given a
> clock precision X, the device knows that its real clock could be
> somewhere between T-X and T+X. There are a finite number of time stamps
> in that interval, and it should be ready to accept them all. Or query
> them all, if it is doing polling.

Surely, then, as Stephane suggests the document should say _that_ instead?

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs@anvilwalrusden.com