Re: [mif] Agenda Time?

Ted Lemon <> Mon, 21 March 2016 16:29 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E2AE12D5BF for <>; Mon, 21 Mar 2016 09:29:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5ikSwstESmsj for <>; Mon, 21 Mar 2016 09:29:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4BE1C12D91C for <>; Mon, 21 Mar 2016 09:29:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certificate Authority - G2" (verified OK)) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 25C59740057; Mon, 21 Mar 2016 16:29:07 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mbx-03.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([]) by CAS-03.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([]) with mapi id 14.03.0224.002; Mon, 21 Mar 2016 09:29:07 -0700
From: Ted Lemon <>
To: Margaret Cullen <>, "" <>
Thread-Topic: [mif] Agenda Time?
Thread-Index: AQHRg4kojdfU5oTRlE2INEZk7cLIbJ9kFWU3
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 16:29:06 +0000
Message-ID: <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B630797A41969@mbx-03.WIN.NOMINUM.COM>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
Cc: Hui Deng <>
Subject: Re: [mif] Agenda Time?
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiple Interface Discussion List <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 16:29:25 -0000

It might be worth having a brief (~10 minute) presentation on the homenet naming architecture document, which has a section on the handling of provisioning domains in the homenet.   I'll be submitting the document later on today; I think that what I'm putting in it regarding provisioning domains will work well, but it would be good to get feedback.

There's also an interesting interaction between DNSSD and MPvD that I hadn't noticed before: if you want services to be able to publish themselves in the local zone, which MPvD is that?   Where do they send the updates?   My current answer is that although there are different resolvers per PvD on the homenet, all of the resolvers will accept updates, since all updates are by definition intended for the homenet PvD, and all of the resolvers are operated by the homenet, and hence capable of handling updates for the homenet PvD.   We don't want services that do updates to have to be smart about PvDs.