IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnssd] Pete Resnick's Discuss on draft-ietf-dnssd-requirements-05: (with DISCUSS)

Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> Thu, 12 March 2015 13:00 UTC

Return-Path: <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
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 D9E4C1A00F4; Thu, 12 Mar 2015 06:00:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.23
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.23 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no
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 8jE2EcZ71PeH; Thu, 12 Mar 2015 06:00:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [IPv6:2001:630:d0:f102::25e]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DFB7D1A00CC; Thu, 12 Mar 2015 06:00:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (localhost.ecs.soton.ac.uk [127.0.0.1]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t2CD0GaP003251; Thu, 12 Mar 2015 13:00:16 GMT
X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.2 falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk t2CD0GaP003251
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=ecs.soton.ac.uk; s=201304; t=1426165217; bh=7g/pbg+ed4XFf0yqbfEdPvvk26g=; h=Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=XhqZ8L/DpJERfzniTm5FINyaLW9n16qQC1XsPbrrowLiU2v7QkGIIYDYckrfsfmwl +Bm3PoiDaLGX3BNl8pLHEvSRA8cFBGOfg93gKDyVMhHPknc3eXkx81PSIwGtHv8E+e E6bJo+wK3K2DYkiJ+VGWZLSuDY1c3OVBV7iCTY4Q=
Received: from gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102::25d]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102::25e]) envelope-from <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> with ESMTP (valid=N/A) id r2BD0G1194707680iw ret-id none; Thu, 12 Mar 2015 13:00:16 +0000
Received: from [IPv6:2001:630:d0:f111:1c53:dbf6:34e2:c371] ([IPv6:2001:630:d0:f111:1c53:dbf6:34e2:c371]) (authenticated bits=0) by gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t2CD0EX1013195 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 12 Mar 2015 13:00:14 GMT
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_D8939B77-AFE9-4874-B5A1-10CED7C42983"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2070.6\))
From: Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <7E4F8F92-000D-4869-816F-D73F62C77E28@nominum.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 13:00:15 +0000
Message-ID: <EMEW3|5cf15a763b70a995f3b2aef51fe876car2BD0G03tjc|ecs.soton.ac.uk|1AC6F6B1-4BB2-46C1-8E42-3AC55E338479@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
References: <20150312020708.27620.27985.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <64537593-69EF-43FA-8660-58812A265EFB@nominum.com> <5500F94C.90702@qti.qualcomm.com> <7E4F8F92-000D-4869-816F-D73F62C77E28@nominum.com> <1AC6F6B1-4BB2-46C1-8E42-3AC55E338479@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2070.6)
X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean
X-smtpf-Report: sid=r2BD0G119470768000; tid=r2BD0G1194707680iw; client=relay,ipv6; mail=; rcpt=; nrcpt=6:0; fails=0
X-ECS-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-ECS-MailScanner-ID: t2CD0GaP003251
X-ECS-MailScanner-From: tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnssd/rzx31cQ1aCh0e5zvV-DZ3SVGCN4>
Cc: draft-ietf-dnssd-requirements.all@ietf.org, Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>, dnssd-chairs@ietf.org, dnssd@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dnssd] Pete Resnick's Discuss on draft-ietf-dnssd-requirements-05: (with DISCUSS)
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: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 13:00:34 -0000

Hi,

> On 12 Mar 2015, at 02:30, Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> wrote:
> 
> On Mar 11, 2015, at 10:26 PM, Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com> wrote:
>> As far as I'm concerned, I've made you (Ted) aware of this issue and I'm happy to clear this part of the DISCUSS and let you contend with it. (Or I can track it; whichever works for you.)
> 
> Let's see what Tim says.

Apologies, I overlooked referring to this in the shepherding document for the requirements draft, as I had thought the disclosure was intended to be on the hybrid solution draft, i.e. on the document proposing a solution for scalable DNS-based SD, as opposed to on the document stating the problem.

Pete is absolutely right that we should review and check this.

Looking at the disclosures, I see that https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2114/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2114/> (on the pre-WG adoption requirements draft) points to an updated disclosure https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2119/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2119/> on the hybrid draft (again, pre WG-adoption).

We should probably report this from the chair’s introduction during dnssd in Dallas, and field any questions if they arise. As Ted says, it has been discussed before. I can add a note to the shepherd document.

Tim

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email