Re: [mdnsext] Discussion of BoF during Berlin IETF

"Brzozowski, John" <John_Brzozowski@Cable.Comcast.com> Sat, 01 June 2013 14:08 UTC

Return-Path: <john_brzozowski@cable.comcast.com>
X-Original-To: mdnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mdnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 713D721F9ED2 for <mdnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 1 Jun 2013 07:08:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.231
X-Spam-Level:
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 mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id N8yotanGsb6i for <mdnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 1 Jun 2013 07:07:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cable.comcast.com (copdcavout01.cable.comcast.com [76.96.32.253]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8033F21F9ED5 for <mdnsext@ietf.org>; Sat, 1 Jun 2013 07:07:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([24.40.56.114]) by copdcavout01.cable.comcast.com with ESMTP id C7WM3M1.74687699; Sat, 01 Jun 2013 08:06:00 -0600
Received: from PACDCEXMB01.cable.comcast.com ([169.254.1.173]) by PACDCEXHUB01.cable.comcast.com ([fe80::84e8:95f3:f13b:169e%12]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.001; Sat, 1 Jun 2013 10:07:52 -0400
From: "Brzozowski, John" <John_Brzozowski@Cable.Comcast.com>
To: "consultancy@vanderstok.org" <consultancy@vanderstok.org>, "mdnsext@ietf.org" <mdnsext@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [mdnsext] Discussion of BoF during Berlin IETF
Thread-Index: AQHOXa6cpLNXm10H/UO639ARcA9srpkfFrIAgAHQ1wA=
Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2013 14:07:50 +0000
Message-ID: <BD87928F6BFAEF4EBEB883E1C4F58772342AC64A@PACDCEXMB01.cable.comcast.com>
In-Reply-To: <5c24b7358f8e4adb71187a17df9fc6bb@xs4all.nl>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.4.130416
x-originating-ip: [24.40.55.73]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <B31CE2C816CA4040B8FA25FAA2CDD5DB@cable.comcast.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [mdnsext] Discussion of BoF during Berlin IETF
X-BeenThere: mdnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of extensions to Bonjour \(mDNS and DNS-SD\) for routed networks." <mdnsext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mdnsext>, <mailto:mdnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mdnsext>
List-Post: <mailto:mdnsext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mdnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mdnsext>, <mailto:mdnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=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.

Peter,

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
=========================================
John Jason Brzozowski
Comcast Cable
m) 484-962-0060
o) 609-377-6594
w) www.comcast6.net
e) john_brzozowski@cable.comcast.com
=========================================






-----Original Message-----
From: peter van der Stok <stokcons@xs4all.nl>
Organization: vanderstok consultancy
Reply-To: "consultancy@vanderstok.org" <consultancy@vanderstok.org>
Date: Friday, May 31, 2013 2:24 AM
To: "mdnsext@ietf.org" <mdnsext@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mdnsext] Discussion of BoF during Berlin IETF

>Ralph,
>
>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:
>> REMINDER!!!!
>> 
>> I'm looking for review and discussion of the BoF proposal and draft
>> charter here:
>> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mdnsext/current/msg00149.html
>> 
>> The mailing list has been quiet (0 responses so far).  Is there still
>> interest in taking on this work?
>> 
>> - Ralph
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> mdnsext mailing list
>> mdnsext@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mdnsext
>_______________________________________________
>mdnsext mailing list
>mdnsext@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mdnsext