Hi Doug,

We currently have a draft published:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-bhandari-dnssd-mdns-gateway/

That addresses the service filtering component that you reference.





On 4/4/14, 2:41 PM, "Douglas Otis" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>On Apr 4, 2014, at 9:54 AM, joel jaeggli <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On 4/4/14, 9:45 AM, Don Sturek wrote:
>>> Hi Douglas,
>>> 
>>> I fail to see how turning all devices in a home into a flat link
>>> local-addressed architecture meets the requirments in the homenet
>>>charter
>>> (http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/homenet/charter/), particularly around
>>> home/guest networks plus a few other areas of the charter.
>>> 
>>> I also fail to see how turning all devices in a dnssd-type deployment
>>>into a
>>> flat link local-addressed architecture meets the requirements in the
>>>dnssd
>>> charter (http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/dnssd/charter/) particularly
>>>around
>>> enterprise networks (eg campus networks) or mesh networks.
>> 
>> afaik dnssd wg/charter wouldn't need to exist if we were to constrain
>> the problem space to a single L2 domain. So i think we can stipulate
>> that the purpose is to work on a routed network.
>
>Dear Joel,
>
>Thank you for you feedback.  I am sure they represent what could be
>described as naive wishful desires.  Careful review of the Educause
>petition indicates their specific desires are NOT satisfied with layer 3
>solutions due to additional constraints not within the vendor's purview
>of which they seem unaware.
>
>The constraint limiting the scope of mDNS is due to typical bridge
>operation.  This constraint is better resolved using an _incremental_
>layer 2 solution offering TLV table based MAC exchanges to permit routing
>at this level rather than use of layer 3 IP routing which has the effect
>of disabling desired services.
>
>Within our organization at a similar scale, this issue has been resolved
>using enterprise grade switches and non-trival configuration.  Use of
>Rbridge, as an example, eliminates complexity without weakening security
>where network boundaries become indeterminate.  At the home scale, no
>service filters should be needed.
>
>At the Educause scale, filters for desired services will be needed.  In
>good conscience, this additional requirement should be part of a DNSSD
>work product!  Apple currently offers global DNS to locate devices based
>on Kerberos individual account authentications before publishing.  There
>is no reason a similar strategy can't be used within the home network by
>bundling requisite services to explicitly authenticate devices made
>visible via DNS.  This would also likely satisfy needs of networks unable
>to support mDNS.
>
>Placement of translated mDNS resources MUST NOT be published into DNS due
>to many security considerations never reasonably satisfied.  mDNS should
>not be considered a safe method to publish internal resources when it
>impairs network boundary detection and potentially lists devices having
>default names indirectly accessible by remote actors.
>
>Please consider security implications for deployers as part of this
>thought process.  Even if only published as a BCP, it would be most
>helpful.
>
>Regards,
>Douglas Otis  
>
>
>
>  
>
>
>  
>
>_______________________________________________
>dnssd mailing list
>[email protected]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnssd

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet

Reply via email to