Subject: Re: [dnssd] WGLC on draft-ietf-dnssd-mdns-dns-interop-02

From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2016 22:12:45 -0400

Hi,

I'm likely to have some time in airports soon, so I want to know what
to do here.  In particular:

On Sat, Apr 02, 2016 at 09:02:46PM -0400, Andrew Sullivan wrote:

> Hmm.  I suppose the point is made clearer if the draft says something
> like, "If you are sure that nothing will go past some context -- where
> that context is either the LAN, or the site-network however defined --
> then local conventions prevail.  Otherwise, parts of the domain names
> to be queried … &c."  Is that clearer?

Is this change ok?

> Stuart has asserted strogly -- and I confess I have some sympathy for
> his claim -- that all the use cases involve pick-lists.  If that's
> true, then the "first way" is never going to happen, and the "second
> way" is the only real option.  And you're right that neither is
> actually consistent with 6055.

I still don't know what to do here.  Suggestions?  Just call out that
there's an explicit inconsistency with 6055?

> > seems architecturally bad.   So I think the confusing is perhaps around the term 
> > “DNS-SD implementations” which could use some elaboration, or at least rewording for consistency
> > with RFC 6055.
> 
> I wish I knew what the WG wanted here.  I'm way more than amenable to text.

I need text to address this, or I'll leave it alone.

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
[email-masked]