Re: [rtcweb] IP handling: Using mDNS names for host candidates

[Bernard Aboba <[e-mail]>]

Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 16:46 Peter said:

Where is the right place to comment on draft-mdns-ice-candidates?
>

I looked at it from an ICE WG perspective, and it seems to be that since
> (in RFC 5245), the candidate address can be a FQDN (section 15.1) you don't
> need the special steps you have in section 3.2, because a .local address is
> a FQDN (isn't it?).  I think the only novel thing would be to perhaps make
> it clear that mDNS should be used for the name resolution.
>

[BA] Using mDNS for resolution does introduce potential failure modes. For
example, in a multi-subnet enterprise network using private addresses,
10.1.1.1/24 and 10.2.1.1/24 could connect via a router whereas mDNS
resolution will fail in the absence of proxies. Whether this matters in
practice depends on the topologies where data channel applications are
deployed.

>