> 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 firstname.lastname@example.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet