Re: [homenet] APPSDIR review of draft-ietf-homenet-arch-10

[Tim Chown <[e-mail]>]

On 19 Sep 2013, at 11:59, S Moonesamy <[e-mail]> wrote:

> At 16:10 18-09-2013, Tim Chown wrote:
> 
>> There is already a split namespace for existing home networks. Devices may live under .local (for mDNS/DNS-SD), which has meaning on the subnet in question (though some emerging vendor products are proxying this through routers - hence the desire to form a dnssdext WG to look at that topic), and/or may use a globally unique name space.
>> 
>> The issue in future home networks is how naming and SD works across a routed, multi-link home. What is the equivalent "local" name space, that can be used whether the home is externally connected or not, providing independent operation where necessary.
>> 
>> That section discusses how that "local" name space might look, and is the result of considerable discussion in the homenet WG.
>> 
>> Do you have something specific to propose to say instead?
> 
> From the above I gather that the namespace issue is currently unresolved.  I suggest stabilizing the document and put the part about namespace on hold.  You could document the discussion for now and list that as unresolved issues.

Apologies for the grievous chop in the above included text, but I think it's worth adding here that the dnssdext proposed charter (under review by the IESG currently I believe) focuses on service discovery, and has been steered away from naming issues. It instead proposes to document the issues arising. But additionally, thanks to Toerless, the proposed charter not only talk about the networking elements of a SD solution, but also what the API would look like to application developers who may be advertising or discovering the services.

As per Mike's question today, the relationship between homenet and a potential dnssdext WG would need further clarification, but there is overlap and there are some mutual interests. 

I'll do a more detailed review of your other comments later. 

Tim