> It wasn't quite the document I was expecting.  But rather seems to
> leverage upon a number of other draft-sctl* documents in progress.

I agree with Michael -- this is not a protocol definition, it is an
informal outline of how a number of other protocols can be made to fit
together.  It has normative dependencies on no less than 5 different
-sctl- drafts, none of which have been adopted by dnssd yet.

I believe that it would be premature to adopt this document.  Let us
please wait and see whether dnssd decides to adopt the depended-upon
drafts.  Let us also see whether the implementation complexity is
manageable, and whether the large number of moving parts causes undesired
brittleness.

I have some other fairly serious nits about this document, but I believe
that the argument above is sufficient.  I am opposed to adoption at this
stage, but look forward to reconsidering once dnssd has had a serious look
at the protocols.

-- Juliusz

_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
homenet@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet

Reply via email to