DNSOP DNSSD has placed a call for adoption for Ray Bellis' document on Multi Qtypes. Current version is here. https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-bellis-dnsext-multi-qtypes-08.html
The DNSOP chairs would like the DNSOP working group to comment on this call for adoption. We are aware that not everyone on this mailing list reads the dnssd mailing list, so feel free to make any comments, etc here. The chairs and authors will incorporate them. The email does not list an explicit end date but two weeks would be November 30, 2023 thanks tim ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Chris Box <[email protected]> Date: Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 1:08 PM Subject: [dnssd] Call for adoption of draft-bellis-dnsext-multi-qtypes into DNSSD To: dnssd <[email protected]> Dear DNSSD folks, This message starts a two-week adoption call for draft-bellis-dnsext-multi-qtypes-08 <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-bellis-dnsext-multi-qtypes-08.html>, ending at 23:59 on 30th November in any timezone. As discussed in the Prague meeting (slides-118-dnssd-multiple-dns-questions <https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/118/materials/slides-118-dnssd-multiple-dns-questions-00>) this is proposed as a way to permit asking for multiple query types in a single DNS query message. This would save capacity on Thread networks, where it is common to need to ask for both SRV and TXT. An alternative existing design is to achieve this with QDCOUNT=2, but such a design conflicts with draft-ietf-dnsop-qdcount-is-one <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-dnsop-qdcount-is-one-01>. That DNSOP draft describes the problems encountered when QDCOUNT>1 and proposes to require that QDCOUNT<=1. The chairs consider that draft-bellis-dnsext-multi-qtypes-08 is consistent with point 2 of the DNSSD charter. Please review the draft and consider whether you support its adoption by DNSSD. Please share any thoughts with the list to indicate support or opposition. Note that this is not a vote. If you are willing to provide a more in-depth review, or are willing to consider implementing it, please state it explicitly to give the chairs an indication of the energy level in the working group willing to work on the document. WG adoption is the start of the process. The fundamental question is whether you agree the proposal is worth the WG's time to work on and whether this draft represents a good starting point. Thanks, Chris (for the chairs) _______________________________________________ dnssd mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnssd
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
