Hi Juliusz, I think we responded to the question in 2014 [1]. I am happy to clarify our text of section 1.2. Could you please point out what in the draft you believe is wrong and what you would like to be updated.
Yours, Daniel [1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/qL5BmPs5LOi281AMTCD_lHt49Is/ On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 8:23 AM Juliusz Chroboczek <[email protected]> wrote: > > #5 The arguments why this is better than DDNS don't convince > > me, except for the last one (new RR types). Given that DDNS is > > deployed, what's the chances that this would also get traction? > > I think that's an important point. I actually asked the very same > question back in 2014: > > > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/CBoLV2St-kSW0vQNE4GtKqRQthA/ > > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/m3tmE8m1pt11YIB5yAtWUMFlv3c/ > > The authors integrated the discussion as Section 1.2 of the draft, which > is what you are referring to. I'm not sure if I'm convinced by their > arguments, I suspect that there's some unstated requirement that I don't > undestand. > > -- Juliusz > > _______________________________________________ > homenet mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet > -- Daniel Migault Ericsson
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
