[dnssd] Review of draft-ietf-dnssd-srp-05

Manuel Amutio <mamutio@kirale.com> Sun, 08 November 2020 20:18 UTC

Return-Path: <mamutio@kirale.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 045DE3A0A4A for <dnssd@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 8 Nov 2020 12:18:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.119
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.119 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kirale-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 04qaYMWhfYaj for <dnssd@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 8 Nov 2020 12:18:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ej1-x636.google.com (mail-ej1-x636.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::636]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 348763A0A73 for <dnssd@ietf.org>; Sun, 8 Nov 2020 12:18:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ej1-x636.google.com with SMTP id i19so9328872ejx.9 for <dnssd@ietf.org>; Sun, 08 Nov 2020 12:18:32 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kirale-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=/BNkl4M7kBJ3F0ZQYpCojSUHZh514Lh004POdazR8FQ=; b=aO1ZEhVX/twk6j9DWSLJovdBGLaPqRo0gy3ANyAGxLcNTpvvBTngzyE+/if3xez3cx gZ0CLzXVdGFuJRhaGDh0BxCQNoVrrtVedC8qbkUYisOVdfBcGZSS3bR5e3UrxgOfc9Eo R0QQ8MKyC5RKxchwb84z0Co33dJKhUyMO0XjuViyDmm+V7/JcR4l3FqD+GFepEjFnCSc JgH3QSMPLXSLSQxup6iG2yg81xYjB4KJcwINipqQnNADef3HY60Xz7ZHKz4hXwqB5eBK e4hHapXKzP95qHBbFqwmSHGPcft0GQKnygdb0dR3X38pbimkI2ql44eY4ExxuQZfPQmM nF+g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=/BNkl4M7kBJ3F0ZQYpCojSUHZh514Lh004POdazR8FQ=; b=HkX9bRh3FA6G49I5heCp8CpNxa/C/HW/qSo+wH+qy0OtvMZnWFfbs2lT6DWqyYjdI+ lUuYFmqnF0/6zDRFdAVEAw12v1yvbHOWVmcc3c5phY2YwTgIVrmG9g8rTj1XYAciidhU wAO6JGPtccjGG3HSA3c5H0AV+yPRdxgOb0imB95s7SbsQ8gqpvdMYxVWTv/98cuWpzV0 3UrrOjBFGVe68WVcyGbfvaim6VoKFWDZ2Ec1+ISmSTJhS9CIDvqBgMMu8k0QBTYigPow 83KGUQ3W+AldRBzZ6gX4LYnvpD6rtNsulXolCdg/RRbfpDQGYyOaGAvKNRoCVGhDbfQX 9f5w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533kpjFeYx+V/aGgoO0wxv/TP/rHBpPdb2nlf0kH50+1DmQ/hiUv rm/IdXh7PxH8CfJS4VFoBXgtRefM1cZEA0HdQe6sivTkOaGPsA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx72oE6pDmP4WloOgA+tSlSYYWd0T7UBrUdDTdZD6yA3AiyC6PdH3BTWThnI69KtJdZnkNiQ8e8V5cQWmPEaEY=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:804:: with SMTP id e4mr11812550ejd.420.1604866710253; Sun, 08 Nov 2020 12:18:30 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Manuel Amutio <mamutio@kirale.com>
Date: Sun, 08 Nov 2020 21:18:18 +0100
Message-ID: <CABXuWKtbNjwtVtiRjQwFrF=1WJ6fEUpQaUZz7iNkL4TG260MoA@mail.gmail.com>
To: dnssd@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000002d4cc105b39e26ca"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnssd/U0hUHjJ0QYfIaORfGepnreX8Dk8>
Subject: [dnssd] Review of draft-ietf-dnssd-srp-05
X-BeenThere: dnssd@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Sun, 08 Nov 2020 20:18:34 -0000

Hi,

I've revised the current version "draft_05" and in general it looks good to
me. I believe that it is an important improvement in the use of automatic
discovery of network services and it is greatly useful for IoT constrained
devices.

Leave my comments below.

Best,
Manuel


/------------- Typos --------------/
Page 9, first paragraph:
"This key pair MUST be unique to the device" is repeated twice.
"+" symbol appears twice.

Page 12, second paragraph:
"Instrructions"

/------------- Doubts -------------/
Page 9, section 2.4.1.1 Service Behavior:
"the key MAY be overwritten as a result of a full reset of the device
(e.g., a "factory reset")"

What happens then?

Page 10, section 2.4.2 Removing published services:
"To remove a service registration, the client retransmits its most recent
update..."
"However, in some cases a client may not have retained sufficient state to
know that some service instance is pointing to a host that it is removing."

Then, how is it able to retransmit an update of something that no longer
knows?

Page 15, section 2.6.2. Sleep Proxy:
This feature conditions the location of SRP Server, right?
If we thought in a Border Router, it would only be useful for external
traffic going through BR, but not for traffic initiated in the mesh
network.
Maybe I have misunderstood it.

Regarding the protocol used, I don't see a clear drawback to not allow
using UDP for the constrained devices. If the DNS service allows it, I
believe that this new protocol should support it too.