Hi Brian, Totally agree with you. In fact, I think Ray asked about the use case for unicast DNS within Homenet. I think locating service names in a small business, dormitory, etc. is that use case where mDNS does not scale well and where a globally unique name is maybe not necessary.......
Don On 9/10/12 8:48 AM, "Brian E Carpenter" <[email protected]> wrote: >Don, > >Yes, based on, and it will be good to see those RFCs out. > >What I'm basically worried about here is ending up with one >toolset for homenets and a different toolset for small enterprise >networks, which seem much more likely to go the DNS way than anything >else. In practice there's no hard and fast boundary between home and >small business. > > Brian > > >On 10/09/2012 15:17, Don Sturek wrote: >> Bonjour is based on mDNS >> (http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-cheshire-dnsext-multicastdns/) >>and >> DNS-SD (http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-cheshire-dnsext-dns-sd/), >> both currently in the RFC editors queue..... >> >> Don >> >> On 9/10/12 6:53 AM, "Brian E Carpenter" <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> On 10/09/2012 14:09, Ray Bellis wrote: >>>> On 10 Sep 2012, at 13:58, Brian E Carpenter >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Using literal addresses is evil for many reasons - surely we don't >>>>> need to >>>>> discuss that ancient question again? >>>> I wasn't promoting it, just noting that this is the current position, >>>> with Bonjour et al becoming the "preferred" way. The latter is "a >>>>good >>>> thing". >>> afaik Bonjour is a proprietary protocol. How can that be a good thing? >>> >>>>> The right question is whether DNS is the appropriate solution for >>>>> converting >>>>> local devices names to addresses, or whether there is some other >>>>> naming service that >>>>> should be the standard. Since DNS is the IETF standard for converting >>>>> names >>>>> to addresses, there would need to be a pretty strong case for >>>>>anything >>>>> else. >>>> The IETF has _other_ protocols for naming services (mDNS, LLMNR) that >>>> are designed for local networks, albeit with the "wrong" multicast >>>>scope >>>> as far as we're concerned. >>> And SLP, explicitly designed for locating services. >>> >>>> My question is therefore more about whether (internal) unicast DNS is >>>> actually required at all. >>> And I'm saying that's the wrong question. >>> >>> I think the right question is whether there is an *open* standard for >>> discovering >>> service addresses from service names that is more suitable than DNS. >>> >>> Brian >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> homenet mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet >> >> >> _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
