IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnssd] Review of draft-ietf-dnssd-hybrid-00

"Albrecht, Harald" <harald.albrecht@siemens.com> Mon, 13 April 2015 08:06 UTC

Return-Path: <harald.albrecht@siemens.com>
X-Original-To: dnssd@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnssd@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E11CF1A8F43 for <dnssd@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Apr 2015 01:06:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.85
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.85 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5] autolearn=ham
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 4MUDBrdGKZ6U for <dnssd@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Apr 2015 01:06:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from david.siemens.de (david.siemens.de [192.35.17.14]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 10C241A8F49 for <dnssd@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Apr 2015 01:06:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail1.sbs.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by david.siemens.de (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id t3D86P0q032147; Mon, 13 Apr 2015 10:06:26 +0200
Received: from DEFTHW99ERKMSX.ww902.siemens.net (defthw99erkmsx.ww902.siemens.net [139.22.70.147]) by mail1.sbs.de (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id t3D86PSF019326 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Mon, 13 Apr 2015 10:06:25 +0200
Received: from DEFTHW99ER2MSX.ww902.siemens.net (139.22.70.75) by DEFTHW99ERKMSX.ww902.siemens.net (139.22.70.147) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.235.1; Mon, 13 Apr 2015 10:06:24 +0200
Received: from DEFTHW99EK5MSX.ww902.siemens.net ([169.254.6.44]) by DEFTHW99ER2MSX.ww902.siemens.net ([139.22.70.75]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Mon, 13 Apr 2015 10:06:24 +0200
From: "Albrecht, Harald" <harald.albrecht@siemens.com>
To: Tom Pusateri <pusateri@bangj.com>, "dnssd@ietf.org" <dnssd@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [dnssd] Review of draft-ietf-dnssd-hybrid-00
Thread-Index: AQHQc9NY983zp1nlA06PXmWeLxJBpJ1Klv5A
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 08:06:23 +0000
Message-ID: <E36F274013087B4EA05E08EB503750390BF6343E@DEFTHW99EK5MSX.ww902.siemens.net>
References: <D3BDB6F2-C288-4C35-98F0-B545043F9659@bangj.com>
In-Reply-To: <D3BDB6F2-C288-4C35-98F0-B545043F9659@bangj.com>
Accept-Language: de-DE, en-US
Content-Language: de-DE
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [139.22.70.35]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnssd/gNKW0yX4nRDZvegaecCiEk8V_BI>
Subject: Re: [dnssd] Review of draft-ietf-dnssd-hybrid-00
X-BeenThere: dnssd@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of extensions to Bonjour \(mDNS and DNS-SD\) for routed networks." <dnssd.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnssd>, <mailto:dnssd-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 08:06:33 -0000

Just a minor note, please see below:

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: dnssd [mailto:dnssd-bounces@ietf.org] Im Auftrag von Tom Pusateri

++++
Section 3 1st paragraph
=======================
	After describing in the previous section what is meant by “on the same link”, Section 3 says unicast DNS domain names are assigned to "each physical link”. The word physical should be removed. Another way to say this may to use “each IP subnet” which could be included in section 2 as well.
++++

From the IPv6 perspective I would like to point out that on a given IPv6 link there are typically many IP subnets simultaneously. In my home network connected via broadband to a big TelCo I have four IPv6 subnet simulatenously: first, the obvious fe80::/10 link-local subnet; next, my own internally stable addresses coming from one of the many fd00::/8 ULA subnets; then a global preferred IPv6 subnet; and finally a deprecated IPv6 subnet that is due to the overlapping rolling subnet addresses we get over here with those "All-IP" broadband access.

So in IPv6 territory we often can see multiple IPv6 subnets bound to the same IPv6 link. Agreed, "physical" doesn't need to apply, as these may be virtual links, such as IEEE 802 VLANs.

++++
Section 5 1st paragraph
=======================
	"For this reason, each physical link may have *two* unrelated ".local." zones, one for IPv4 and one for IPv6.”
	The word “physical” is used again here but I would prefer to see IP subnet or just link without the “physical” since you defined what link meant.
++++

I would like to ask for "link" (as in "IPv6 link" as we have a definition for that term in the RFCs) for the reasons outlined above.


Wit best regards,
Harald

Siemens AG
Gleiwitzer Str. 555
90475 Nuernberg, Germany 

Siemens Aktiengesellschaft: Chairman of the Supervisory Board: Gerhard Cromme; Managing Board: Joe Kaeser, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer; Roland Busch, Lisa Davis, Klaus Helmrich, Janina Kugel, Siegfried Russwurm, Ralf P. Thomas; Registered offices: Berlin and Munich, Germany; Commercial registries: Berlin Charlottenburg, HRB 12300, Munich, HRB 6684; WEEE-Reg.-No. DE 23691322

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email