> Juliusz, the problem is that existing home network devices that do > DNS-based service discovery do not support DNS update. They could, but > they don't, because we didn't define an easy way for them to do it.
I'd be grateful if you could expand on that. Why can't we define a way for clients to do DDNS? (I'm asking for technical reasons, not administrative reasons, I'm aware that this would probably be outside the Homenet charter.) > Just 2136 isn't enfough, because there's no authentication scheme, I don't understand this argument. How is non-secured DDNS any less secure than mDNS? What am I missing? > If you think this is a can of worms you'd rather not open, I can > understand that, but Stuart and I have had some pretty good conversations > about this, and I remain convinced that we can make it work, > so I'd encourage you to see what comes out of that process rather than > assuming that the situation is hopeless. Oh, sure, we Poles are not quite as pessimistic as the Finns. I'm actually of a divided mind here -- I rather like distributed solutions (hence prefer mDNS to DDNS) but dislike proxying. Part of me just wishes we'd mandate site-local multicast and do mDNS over that. -- Juliusz _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
