Re: [dnssd] Should DNSSD meet at IETF 120?

Ted Lemon <> Fri, 26 April 2024 22:44 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB99CC1654EC for <>; Fri, 26 Apr 2024 15:44:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.895
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.895 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=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 c2PlReA5jGj5 for <>; Fri, 26 Apr 2024 15:44:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f2d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 14418C14CF09 for <>; Fri, 26 Apr 2024 15:44:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id 6a1803df08f44-6a071595d22so14339196d6.3 for <>; Fri, 26 Apr 2024 15:44:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20230601; t=1714171483; x=1714776283;; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=7tGXAOeTpNreI7sOWQR1IPweiXwzBpv5uE6MiUQLuDk=; b=hnMkyiOVUvhMVIHyAHdkSlWGPOy52MFL9gL+R+jqWlrQ4a+Af8kYAb0yj1viyivVXV ELDyAEKK8lP2qolBGcZ/Hmi0tLEGO5+6yPpG6BUhk3EGEEGBZy4nDDClWDJkyZlTghjr ecvAXcLYe8NKYjgSokBHyx7CNVAhyNoJQTaWxPFMN0ryTTManPTMNi+8HgOed6ZMpYj6 DFjjzXZefdiXfBTlKnLTiy4bFvrDMtFbu6gaa773cKte14XVGcrC0gkm1+l06Z1FkOhv 4gxJvvjls/IWpCuswLXoN0ndDyStF75RA9XXCkKEH/77/o3hBmE3DzkYHNDacmFO/F2r 1GFA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20230601; t=1714171483; x=1714776283; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=7tGXAOeTpNreI7sOWQR1IPweiXwzBpv5uE6MiUQLuDk=; b=Z/tM3A8Rq65WpRqx4delvIZcqGE+aQdVT1dyfJ/bK2ydzse1jjQ78iihCsX+mf8Rqm C5SSrIkS7Q0qIHCGQuBRB/vsci5FS5BvFowOpk3xvRNt9dk1PqMBjCmga1G3XPqbSQB7 IUquVUwRbl1HYPrrX3mu1BmjsGdDT1Tu64/OI2wLMh8n2tGIPTr0L3fgg8Iwm/YkMhDV DTRNdzybkJj4xiJxiB9CsiFMfwCxYCWpFd0aWFXUoPxh3zVrAMOh95OmxLVTmIUrnOFE 9GC+/pbh/TbQNoJbiDc04vWbnkIhnhnhmXdNKDGfzy54Lfx9BkLdG2jIdScZ7XMbhl5u Wb1A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzJOy5QxZ1cv5EWzTLpS8hnusYL7H7JOXEnS/94ok6mwHYYdBxS dKRxjB6vimklzLwQt++1AB0XqQ9qbAv/3bcLMBZM8iXzxOUIb+JRO4jH9ygw40ydtqxXVbClGk2 oiI/XZGPE/2EuVw3E9I6yjOXSg6mpzIcYOlD5DQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGXds/1NAoJw6CjTEfe6XxWSnhb+h2vebgduUXd3WKjQRlmJkGh++9BLKgXnt/S0yxSYshU/C0hd4ZrwxYTfrI=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:f2a:b0:6a0:9448:a751 with SMTP id iw10-20020a0562140f2a00b006a09448a751mr4459726qvb.12.1714171483488; Fri, 26 Apr 2024 15:44:43 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Ted Lemon <>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2024 18:44:07 -0400
Message-ID: <>
To: David Schinazi <>
Cc: DNSSD <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000005ba7af061707a699"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [dnssd] Should DNSSD meet at IETF 120?
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Fri, 26 Apr 2024 22:44:49 -0000

Fifteen minutes each with some slop in the schedule ought to be enough.

The problem with prioritizing working group documents is that what I work
on is driven by what's causing problems. The challenge with e.g.
Advertising Proxy, which is adopted, is that it's working as it is, and so
I haven't had time to actually implement the new proposal because it's not
urgent, so even though it's working group work it winds up getting short
shrift. :(

On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 6:36 PM David Schinazi <>

> Thanks Ted! Do you have a rough estimate of how much time you'd like for
> each of these?
> As usual, we'll focus meeting time on adopted items before considering
> individual drafts or other topics.
> David
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 2:06 PM Ted Lemon <> wrote:
>> I think so. We actually have at least four things I want to talk about:
>> 1. A report/discussion on the EDNS(0) TSR update and implementation
>> 2. A discussion about compressing SRP updates for constrained networks
>> (has suddenly become topical)
>> 3. DNS Push additional data update (has also suddenly become topical)
>> 4. Updated Advertising Proxy document (stretch goal)
>> A fifth topic that's sort of crossover between DNSSD and SNAC is
>> automatic centralization of SRP/DNSSD on home/SOHO networks. This has
>> become a hot topic for home routers and it would be nice if we had a way
>> for home routers to announce that they can act as centralized DNSSD servers
>> and for SNAC routers to take advantage of the centralized SRP/DNSSD
>> service. This last bit is nothing new—it's on the SNAC charter—but I've had
>> people asking me more urgently than had previously been the case to figure
>> out how to do this, so...
>> On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 4:50 PM David Schinazi <>
>> wrote:
>>> Hi DNSSD enthusiasts,
>>> Planning for IETF 120 has started. The chairs are wondering whether
>>> DNSSD should meet at IETF 120 in Vancouver this July. Please share requests
>>> for agenda items (including expected durations) in response to this email.
>>> If there are sufficient requests, we will schedule a session. The requested
>>> length will also depend on the agenda requests we receive.
>>> Additionally, we would like to hear feedback about our session at IETF
>>> 119 in Brisbane. As a reminder, we tried something new by having a joint
>>> session with SNAC. We're interested in any thoughts you might have about
>>> that experiment. In particular, is this something that we should consider
>>> repeating?
>>> Thanks,
>>> David
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> dnssd mailing list