Re: [dnssd] Example Use Cases (was Re: Rechartering)

"R. Atkinson" <> Mon, 23 July 2018 15:12 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB650130EBA for <>; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 08:12:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-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 hQbysz5VPuKi for <>; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 08:11:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::22a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4ABAA12D7F8 for <>; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 08:11:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id n6-v6so951599qtl.4 for <>; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 08:11:58 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=qqviJRQ5U9KpaILh43iPkXtTcDj+gGoDYPLlDgvYJdc=; b=pfwl8YL/SYneW6l/V8GkyVcWBVUmlnOza7NnhOM9Dkasgl725oUpl+K9W3/6Apybx5 1N1uiuC0FSWdlbAjIy9LpYE9uWqNYVU/WgK6kBxFIxBVVNSafE9Mr8w9rtwJj0yr8nTD Bu3Z0Um2b1y+od4E2gYxJEAKZbIfQvB0lUZAr/UFYlh/wmsoXjvRTxsRMX6+O/v+7ZJL iaM8tx/TJpFWpAIZa2c34u0qKyq62k+2VWOWSguQ0Vv5N4N2bNo5xh+ESuw2zO24rb8U avTMpz6ohPC1eAxYcecd87XibcBYPikfjznCBM2l9vmjrS1grz0WbA2xHtEDIUWex7bB 5bKQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=qqviJRQ5U9KpaILh43iPkXtTcDj+gGoDYPLlDgvYJdc=; b=rlEkZhwn2DNu/llFns7BHyhmmOMppYKTkN+r/fxlU2C1qbRPd0dA5ITvyZ1XIhLWk1 WREl1iUB3IvUgm0yiX99xnFDMuUOxyRT4cwRbi+Tev5830lL4qBR7fQUuR6NtZPhs82y hn0UVBAQHuLWlSokEJ0Rrkg+sQKpNxxDNq1Y6ZcwBurTDLHSe0D6ZzIScFq71qhQmhMG 9FPTCx7bxrxIetV2wE520w21GrgkcOKgc31pkBli0iB5aWc8PwHNhBZPCa17d9LxW5a5 YDoxSDEKQZXCaQ9BQmg/WSz/reolQKRscmarlKWyiij+10uZ2i49QsaLqAny842edc/Y qO1g==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlE1nMTdgY1RYIX9tWRcUEju0cDmMkj/8J/xOy0Tz9sJzTUgi/1m SRBfCJTuDAod2a3uY0byH3lLW41I
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpflrqc9g9rUmq8FvtHiPMkKH3dRN8PyzagqGsInWIx3TUsSqlBsmy1pfV2uv/8J7ulPeHhnEQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a0c:86f3:: with SMTP id 48-v6mr11449866qvg.165.1532358716972; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 08:11:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ( []) by with ESMTPSA id r62-v6sm6990045qkl.85.2018. (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 23 Jul 2018 08:11:56 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: "R. Atkinson" <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2018 11:11:54 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <> <7001.1532128071@localhost> <> <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [dnssd] Example Use Cases (was Re: Rechartering)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
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: Mon, 23 Jul 2018 15:12:01 -0000

> On Jul 23, 2018, at 08:47, Ted Lemon <> wrote:
> Of course, one reason that there are no servers is that setting them up
> and having reliable access to them is punitively difficult.  

Yes, but the killer part of this is that none of the “enterprise servers”
(for whatever network services seem to be common) are really easy 
to configure and deploy, as near as I can tell.  All of them require
some kind of IT staff (or at least a reasonably technical person).  

Typical residences (again, not IETF participants) and small businesses
generally don’t have even one technical person.  I expect % of technical
folks with complex residences will vary in some geographies 
(e.g. Silicon Valley, RTP NC, Kanata ON), of course.

> In a world where service discovery and enrollment are easy, we might see
> a softening of the borders between those two use cases.  

We could.  I’m not so sure since my 2nd use case (Large Enterprise) has
IT staff and deploys various kinds of servers already, while the 1st use case
lacks IT staff and doesn’t today deploy servers.    

From what I am seeing, I think the big barrier to local server deployment
is the knowledge required to correctly deploy a local server.  This is a big
issue whether its a DNS server or some other kind of server (e.g. SMTP/POP).

Some company could make good money by creating an IT server that
is MUCH MUCH easier to deploy, configure, and update/maintain.

If I were still building routers, I’d be looking at DNS-SD as a differentiation
opportunity for enterprise customers.  Adding some kind of DNS-SD
cache/proxy/enrollment capability likely would sell well and should be
practical to implement.  Some existing enterprise routers already have 
a (traditional / unicast) DNS proxy / DNS resolver built-in, so adding 
support for mDNS caching/proxying and/or DNS-SD enrollment 
would not be a huge leap.

For residences or small businesses, that sort of capability likely would need 
to be added into a CPE router provided by the ISP before it would become 
much easier to deploy inside the home or small business.  Even if this happened,
due to CPE router enhancements, it is not clear that the deployment would go 
beyond “.local” or similar.  Put another way, it still would be unlikely to include 
a global-scope DNS FQDN.

> I'm also not convinced that there's a huge difference between them from our perspective.   ISTM that the second model is just the first model with more features enabled.  

What is the meaning of "ISTM" ??

The two cases quoted below both fall into the 1st case for my note
from 20 July 2018 @ 12:44 US EDT.

> And, by the way, you didn't talk about the model of the corporation that has an
> IT staff running their network, which AFAIK is still pretty common for larger 
> enterprises.  

Yes, I did.  It is Case 2 in my note from 20 July 2018 @ 12:44 US EDT.
For example, note my use of the phrase “IT staff” in the 3rd paragraph 
of Case 2. 

From where I sit, I doubt very much that Case 1 and Case 2 from my
note of 20 July will converge anytime soon, which is a good part of
why I enumerated them as separate use cases.

(Of course, other folks data might vary from mine, so other folks’ 
perspectives also might vary. :-)



> Is that contradicted by your experience?
> On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 2:40 PM, R. Atkinson <> wrote:
> > On Jul 20, 2018, at 19:07, Michael Richardson <> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > R. Atkinson <> wrote:
> >> In these environments, I rarely see any servers within a small
> >> business.
> > 
> > So, no (surveillance) cameras, scanners and no shared folders?
> > It's just printers, which are passive until you need them.
> With respect to small businesses, 
> — I sometimes see scanners.  Sometimes this is an all-in-one printer
>     with integrated fax and scanner.
> — Often, particularly if there is no (brand-name omitted here) servers,
>      then there are no shared folders, just USB sticks and email to move files.
> — Printers predominate.
> With respect to residential,
> — There are a wider range of mDNS devices, such as streaming media
>      players, OTA TV DVRs that can stream media, (surveillance) cameras, 
>      and what not.
> — Scanners might appear also, of course, as might fax machines.
> Ran
> _______________________________________________
> dnssd mailing list