Re: [mdnsext] Discussion of BoF during Berlin IETF

"Brzozowski, John" <> Sat, 01 June 2013 14:08 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 713D721F9ED2 for <>; Sat, 1 Jun 2013 07:08:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.231
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.231 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id N8yotanGsb6i for <>; Sat, 1 Jun 2013 07:07:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8033F21F9ED5 for <>; Sat, 1 Jun 2013 07:07:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP id C7WM3M1.74687699; Sat, 01 Jun 2013 08:06:00 -0600
Received: from ([]) by ([fe80::84e8:95f3:f13b:169e%12]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.001; Sat, 1 Jun 2013 10:07:52 -0400
From: "Brzozowski, John" <>
To: "" <>, "" <>
Thread-Topic: [mdnsext] Discussion of BoF during Berlin IETF
Thread-Index: AQHOXa6cpLNXm10H/UO639ARcA9srpkfFrIAgAHQ1wA=
Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2013 14:07:50 +0000
Message-ID: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [mdnsext] Discussion of BoF during Berlin IETF
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of extensions to Bonjour \(mDNS and DNS-SD\) for routed networks." <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 01 Jun 2013 14:08:00 -0000

I just took a quick look at the proposal as well, seems to cover most
essential areas.  I see that Zigbee was called out, it might be good to
ensure that it is clear that the home is called out as a key use case.


Regarding your comment below what are your thought around separately
internal and external access to SD data.  Specifically I am thinking SD
within the home as alluded below can and perhaps should be autonomous.  I
think it may be useful to split up how SD is performed in a premise from
how it may be made available northbound either by a service provider or
other third party.  Separating the work can help to ensure that we move
parts of this work forward independently.

John Jason Brzozowski
Comcast Cable
m) 484-962-0060
o) 609-377-6594

-----Original Message-----
From: peter van der Stok <>
Organization: vanderstok consultancy
Reply-To: "" <>
Date: Friday, May 31, 2013 2:24 AM
To: "" <>
Subject: Re: [mdnsext] Discussion of BoF during Berlin IETF

>I am certainly interested in this work and agree with the charter,
>which has improved with respect to the former version.
> From the point of view of building control, it is essential to do
>disovery on a multilink stand-alone network, and not needing to change
>the applications when the network is connected to a backbone with access
>to DNS. From the outside the resources on the now connected network
>should be visible with the same names, possibly suffixed with additional
>domain name information.
>In the past I have commented on the requirements and I am looking
>forward to a new version.
>Peter van der Stok.
>Ralph Droms schreef op 2013-05-31 05:24:
>> I'm looking for review and discussion of the BoF proposal and draft
>> charter here:
>> The mailing list has been quiet (0 responses so far).  Is there still
>> interest in taking on this work?
>> - Ralph
>> _______________________________________________
>> mdnsext mailing list
>mdnsext mailing list