Hi,

I’d recommend people who are interested in this topic read 
draft-cheshire-dnssd-roadmap-00, which you might miss if just looking at the 
draft-sctl-* drafts.

Tim

> On 31 Jul 2017, at 13:09, Ted Lemon <mel...@fugue.com> wrote:
> 
> This is an architecture document, not a protocol specification. 
> 
> On Jul 31, 2017 7:36 AM, "Juliusz Chroboczek" <j...@irif.fr> wrote:
> > I wanted to know if the scope of this is reasonable and is what the
> > working group wants to take on.
> 
> I think the scope of this is too wide.  It tries to solve a number of
> different problems:
> 
>   1. naming within the Homenet;
>   2. publishing names of Homenet nodes outside the Homenet;
>   3. resolving names outside the Homenet in the presence of multiple 
> providers;
>   4. announcing multiple providers' naming spaces when the providers
>      provide inconsistent information.
> 
> My gut feeling is that if you insist on a single protocol that solves all
> four, you'll end up with more complexity than if you solve each problem on
> its own.
> 
> > If it's not, then I don't actually know how to proceed.
> 
> I suggest picking just one problem and solving it.  (1) in the above list
> would be the obvious choice.
> 
> -- Juliusz
> _______________________________________________
> homenet mailing list
> homenet@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet

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

Reply via email to