Subject: Discovering Named Instances of Abstract Services using DNS

From: Stuart Cheshire <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2002 20:30:38 -0700

While we're talking about DNS-SD, this is a good opportunity to correct a 
misconception that some people seem to have.

Some people seem to believe that Apple is not allowed to ship products 
using DNS-SD until the IETF has approved it. This is false.

Apple, or any other company, is allowed to ship products using whatever 
networking protocols they choose.

AppleTalk is an example of a protocol that Apple shipped and continues to 
ship without seeking any outside permission or approval. The AppleShare 
IP file sharing protocol is another protocol that Apple shipped and 
continues to ship without seeking any outside permission or approval. 
Microsoft and other companies do the same all the time.

What is different in this case is that Apple is willing to share this 
protocol with the IETF. Of course Apple has patents to protect its 
intellectual property, but I am working with Apple's lawyers on getting 
an IPR statement offering a royalty-free license to those patents for the 
purpose of implementing this specification. If members of the IETF want 
to contribute to make this an open protocol, then Apple is willing to do 
that. If no one in the IETF cares about this, then Apple will continue to 
ship it, and it will be just like UPnP or FireWire or Bluetooth or USB or 
any of a countless list of other protocols that companies ship without 
any IETF involvement whatsoever.

I'd like to take this opportunity to conduct a little survey.

<http://files.dns-sd.org/draft-cheshire-dnsext-nias.txt>

How many people have read the draft and think it is a good idea?

How many people have read the draft and think it is a bad idea?

At this stage let's hold off on the arguments why --
right now I'm just looking for a one-line answer:
"I've read NIAS and I think it is good," or,
"I've read NIAS and I think it is bad."

Stuart Cheshire <[email-masked]>
 * Wizard Without Portfolio, Apple Computer
 * Chairman, IETF ZEROCONF
 * www.stuartcheshire.org

---

From: Joshua Graessley <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2002 00:49:10 -0700

I've read NIAS and I think it is good

-josh

---

From: Robert Elz <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2002 20:19:14 +0700

Date:        Wed, 7 Aug 2002 20:30:38 -0700
    From:        Stuart Cheshire <[email-masked]>
    Message-ID:  <[email-masked]>

  | <http://files.dns-sd.org/draft-cheshire-dnsext-nias.txt>

I haven't read that draft, I find it too hard to keep up with ones
that are in the I-D directories.   I read what might be an earlier
version in the I-D directories.

If you seriously expect the WG to consider this, you really should take
the effort to keep it current (which means perhaps resubmitting it once
every 6 months if there are no changes happening).

  | How many people have read the draft and think it is a bad idea?

Assuming that nothing substantive has changed, that's me.   I sent private
mail in response to a private message saying why already...

Others here are also covering many of the same points, and more my reply
didn't get down to smaller details like abuse of TXT records, or name space 
pollution).

kre