Re: [homegate] Proposed Charter Update - 2010/09/09

[Andrew Sullivan <[e-mail]>]

On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 02:53:52PM +0200, Mark Townsley wrote:
> > 
> > Why are local and global naming bundled here? I presume we have dyndns
> > and other solutions for the global naming problem already, and that
> > problem space seems different from the local routed network problem.
> 
> Bundled because if DNS is used for both, you hit a split DNS issue that
> must be carefully addressed.

Let me put on my dnsext hat for a moment and agree with Mark.  Llmnr
and mDNS are treated up in the clients as though they're just part of
the unified DNS name space.  But they're not part of that name space.
Moreover, stuff leaks from local networks to the global DNS all the
time.  If it didn't, we wouldn't need the AS112 project and drafts
like draft-ietf-dnsop-default-local-zones (even though that latter
isn't explicitly named at the home network).  Even DNS experts can't
navigate the huge number of DNS-related RFCs.  So developing a codex
for home network device implementers would be very helpful: "Here's
the stuff you need to know, and here's where it's written down." 

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
[e-mail]
Shinkuro, Inc.