Re: discovery and draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-ports
Lars Eggert <lars.eggert@nokia.com> Wed, 16 February 2011 16:55 UTC
Return-Path: <lars.eggert@nokia.com>
X-Original-To: tsvwg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tsvwg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6A913A6B7C for <tsvwg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Feb 2011 08:55:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.58
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.58 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.020, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 h9b71wBWtPTb for <tsvwg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Feb 2011 08:55:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mgw-da02.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [147.243.128.26]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C38E3A6E9D for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Feb 2011 08:55:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.fit.nokia.com (esdhcp030222.research.nokia.com [172.21.30.222]) by mgw-da02.nokia.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p1GGu5kw029466 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 16 Feb 2011 18:56:06 +0200
Subject: Re: discovery and draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-ports
X-Virus-Status: Clean
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.96.5 at fit.nokia.com
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail-43--406905474"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha1"
From: Lars Eggert <lars.eggert@nokia.com>
In-Reply-To: <4D5BFC8F.1090506@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 18:55:57 +0200
Message-Id: <49FFC0E6-060A-4524-B558-B4CEF6438570@nokia.com>
References: <4D5BFC8F.1090506@cisco.com>
To: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082)
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.6 (mail.fit.nokia.com); Wed, 16 Feb 2011 18:56:03 +0200 (EET)
X-Nokia-AV: Clean
Cc: tsvwg <tsvwg@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tsvwg>
List-Post: <mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 16:55:44 -0000
Hi, On 2011-2-16, at 18:34, Eliot Lear wrote: > The current draft doesn't really delve sufficiently into discovery of > services. Currently it seems that every other request I deal with has > some sort of discovery component to it. I would like us to consider > gating normatively on draft-cheshire-dnsext-sd and requiring its use for > discovery. I think this is fully out of scope for an RFC that intends to describe IANA registry management practices. (I'd be all for a different BCP that would try to get consensus for this in the IETF, however.) Lars
- discovery and draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-ports Eliot Lear
- Re: discovery and draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-ports Lars Eggert