Re: Last Call: 'Linklocal Multicast Name Resolution (LLMNR)' to Proposed Standard

[Russ Allbery <rra at stanford.edu>]

Stuart Cheshire <cheshire at apple.com> writes:

> What happened here was *not* that the DNSEXT working group disagreed
> with me on the technical details of my solution. What happened was that
> the DNSEXT working group disagreed with me on the problem statement. I
> said, "Here's a proposed way to do simple effective service discovery
> using existing DNS record types." The DNSEXT working group said, "The
> DNS protocol is not to be used for service discovery. We forbid it, and
> furthermore, to prove the point, we're going to design a protocol of our
> own that superficially looks like yours but can't be used for service
> discovery."

And, of course, this is now a particularly non-sensical position given
that DNS is being widely used for service discovery (RFC 2782, which is
standards track, not to mention AFSDB records which have been part of DNS
since RFC 1183 and are in widespread use in the AFS community despite the
experimental status).

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra at stanford.edu)             <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf