Re: [netlmm] I-D Action:draft-ietf-netlmm-lma-discovery-05.txt

jouni korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com> Wed, 15 September 2010 21:11 UTC

Return-Path: <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: netlmm@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netlmm@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED1513A69BE for <netlmm@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 14:11:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id x4MeGomcbhm2 for <netlmm@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 14:11:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-bw0-f44.google.com (mail-bw0-f44.google.com [209.85.214.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7C263A69BF for <netlmm@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 14:11:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by bwz9 with SMTP id 9so1318598bwz.31 for <netlmm@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 14:12:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:subject:mime-version :content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc:content-transfer-encoding :message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=TaOMl+87zE05xn7ZBAyZ5OBuZviXLDMIhbhEC0uDrYo=; b=kv2rtKV0JamUZOEUV520v1HUKstqZCEzJdhhHlgcPMZ+t/dB/5PZ+B/wCRKhVs8ARW oXxSmLSDI9zi3wSAj/Sx2SYocpTtW9G608fZK/aqChILK3jWCi+DbPc53oR/FBx5400Z 08DtREUYtHBznI4E5kLJLjuE49hkl9Op73rvo=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; b=Za6rKqOzoLVZU6+f8MQPtGvPX+Hwj7fgvdPhYiLSfwRgfoc3ldUvCyRngLo+Tc9Owj CfJ6448cxA8L0hAUsMMuSILa4lvelEadCWcOqEofFUMwIlDcOrMwqSax+4XAWv8IDzsT 7hZilmuv7bethBkUMNjfuhHFOn6iNBqDbaD2I=
Received: by 10.204.77.212 with SMTP id h20mr1785160bkk.33.1284585133272; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 14:12:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from a88-114-170-247.elisa-laajakaista.fi (a88-114-170-247.elisa-laajakaista.fi [88.114.170.247]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id s34sm1751704bkk.13.2010.09.15.14.12.10 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 15 Sep 2010 14:12:11 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1078)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: jouni korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <706576.39689.qm@web111409.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2010 00:12:19 +0300
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <B2EC04E7-686D-440D-961B-F17DD9B0C647@gmail.com>
References: <20100913094506.6B51C3A6954@core3.amsl.com> <890653.19874.qm@web111402.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4C8EF580.7070700@gmail.com> <47245.1688.qm@web111415.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <CE4ECD0E-F23F-4FB3-9CDB-BF33C46FCE23@gmail.com> <83313.87762.qm@web111402.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <D0B210ED-DA43-42DB-BF54-45225F4AA253@gmail.com> <706576.39689.qm@web111409.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
To: Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya@ieee.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1078)
Cc: netlmm@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netlmm] I-D Action:draft-ietf-netlmm-lma-discovery-05.txt
X-BeenThere: netlmm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETLMM working group discussion list <netlmm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netlmm>, <mailto:netlmm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netlmm>
List-Post: <mailto:netlmm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netlmm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netlmm>, <mailto:netlmm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 21:11:54 -0000

Dear Behcet,

On Sep 15, 2010, at 10:38 PM, Behcet Sarikaya wrote:

>>>> 
>>>> IETF  can.. but does not have to. I like the current content  of Section 7. 
>> For 
>> 
>>> 
>>>> the record, the 3GPP boat has already sailed. Not much to  do  there.
> 
> 
> Who should take the responsibility for this?

I guess it is the evil telecom companies to blame here for coming up with a solution where they could use existing DNS specifications without even bothering IANA.

> Look back at the mail archive, Julien and Christian pointed at the right 
> direction on DNS discovery long time ago.

I assume you are referring to: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netlmm/current/msg06183.html

We did add the main body of the MN ID based deterministic FQDN selection idea to Section 4 (was earlier Section 5). Since then above guys seem to have been OK, at least that is how I interpreted the silence.

> 
> I have been shouting since then what should be done and having a dialogue des 
> sourds with you and Jonne.

I assume you are referring to: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netlmm/current/msg06468.html

We did follow the suggestion to drop the Section 4 ;) Btw, I still don't understand what is the problem if a MAG behaves as "an ordinary host makes a DNS query". The simpler the better.

> 
> Anyways, DNS discovery is mission not accomplished in this draft.

Go ahead and actually _propose_ text on DNS based discovery that a) does not cause IANA actions and b) aligns with Section 3 (e.g. where the Service Name != RFC2782 _Service).

- Jouni


> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Behcet
> 
> 
> 
>