Re: [dnssd] CoAP resource discovery and DNS-SD

Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> Fri, 13 May 2022 23:57 UTC

Return-Path: <eckert@i4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
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 3DA6EC1D34FE; Fri, 13 May 2022 16:57:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.871
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.871 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.248, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id w8XYykl6b0Sy; Fri, 13 May 2022 16:57:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [IPv6:2001:638:a000:4134::ffff:40]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8388DC1D34F9; Fri, 13 May 2022 16:57:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [131.188.34.51]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AF8E158C4AF; Sat, 14 May 2022 01:57:12 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix, from userid 10463) id A295F4EAEA2; Sat, 14 May 2022 01:57:12 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Sat, 14 May 2022 01:57:12 +0200
From: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>
To: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Cc: core@ietf.org, dnssd@ietf.org
Message-ID: <Yn7wWNAeLWz/qZlG@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
References: <Yn7nnX096f0LdonI@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <CAPt1N1n7Pd7yZ1jzBGMWCv-Vkf1iT_nLPmHrNYvDkwVjE7QmhA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAPt1N1n7Pd7yZ1jzBGMWCv-Vkf1iT_nLPmHrNYvDkwVjE7QmhA@mail.gmail.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnssd/d349YPYyMTAUqyMjS9D0lkP_GAs>
Subject: Re: [dnssd] CoAP resource discovery and DNS-SD
X-BeenThere: dnssd@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34
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, 13 May 2022 23:57:26 -0000

Thanks, Ted

Any pointer to Kerry's work in this regard ? I was looking through her expired
draft, but i didn't see anything getting to that exact point
(draft-doi-core-parameter-option looks like related, but i can't really
 make heads or tails out of it).

So lets say:

REQ: GET /.well-known/core?rt=<resource>

     RES: 2.05 Content
     Content-Format: 40
     Payload:
     </b>;rt=<resource>;p=<prio>;w=<weight>;proto=<string>,
     ...

I am just defining in the spec for my resource that it has additional option
link-target attributes. p= for a numeric priority value, w= for a numeric
weight attribute and proto= for a string enumerating protocol details.
And these are the same parameters as what i'd use for the same resource
(oops: service) when using DNS-SD.

It seems as if rfc6690 didn't actually create a registry for those link-targets
but simply created rt= and if= link-targets and just created a registry for
the values of rt= and if=. Which raises the question if i could simply
specify p/w/proto to be normative in the context of the specific resource,
and if not whether those addtiional link-targets would have to be specified as
updated to rfc6690...

Cheers
    Toerless

On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 07:22:41PM -0400, Ted Lemon wrote:
> We were never able to figure that out either. The mapping from Core RD in
> particular to DNS-SD is something that the DNS-SD working group actually
> pursued for a while (Kerry Lynn worked on this pretty heavily for about a
> year).
> 
> On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 7:20 PM Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> wrote:
> 
> > Dear CoAP WG
> >
> > I am trying to figure out how to use CoAP discovery as specified in RFC7252
> > (and expanded in rfc6690 and rfc7390),  but i can not figure out how
> > one would encode basic parameters of a resource, such as those supported
> > in DNS-SD, rfc6763:
> >
> > When discovering more than one instance of a resource, such as possible,
> > when using multicast discovery as on rfc7252, clients will have to figure
> > out,
> > which instance of a resource to select. DNS-SSD has priority and weight
> > parameters associated with each instance. How would one describe/encode
> > such instance and weight ?
> >
> > When discovering one or more instance via DNS-SD, the discoering client
> > may further select the best instance in terms of interoperability,
> > functionality
> > and performance based on one or more key=value property pairs describing
> > the instance. How is this done in CoAP ?
> >
> > Thanks a lot!
> >
> > Toerless
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > dnssd mailing list
> > dnssd@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnssd
> >

-- 
---
tte@cs.fau.de