Hi Peter,
At 12:41 PM +0200 8/25/05, Peter Dambier wrote:
Stuart Cheshire wrote:
The IESG has received a request from the DNS Extensions WG to
consider the following document:
- 'Linklocal Multicast Name Resolution (LLMNR) '
<draft-ietf-dnsext-mdns-42.txt> as a Proposed Standard
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action. Please send any comments to the
iesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org or ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org mailing lists by
2005-08-24.
I really would appreciate do think IESG should postpone or reject.
This protocoll is untested!
Its implementation could result in a loss of lives!
There is no reference implementation.
The IETF does not define reference implementations. This document
has been submitted for Proposed Standard (PS) publication, and there
are no specific implementation requirements for publication at the PS
level, which is the first level of the IETF standards track. Two
interoperable implementations are required for advancement to Draft
Standard.
However, I have been told (although I cannot personally verify this)
that the LLMNR protocol has been implemented in Microsoft WinCE 5.0,
and that statement is supported by the release notes that can be
found at:
http://download.microsoft.com/download/0/8/0/08000f6b-974b-4384-90d0-26440d9ecbcf/relnotes.rtf
Apple's mDNS protocol differs from LLMNR (and DNS) in more than
half a dozen ways.
1. It is emplemented.
2. Mostly everybody does use it.
3. mDNS did not result in the loss of lives.
Apple mDNS and LLMNR use different ports, as well as different
multicast addresses, and because of the many protocol
differences, do not interoperate.
The DNSEXT WG understands that LLMNR is not identical to the Apple
mDNS protocol and that it will not interoperate with it. In fact,
the reason that LLMNR runs on a different port is that it is known to
be different.
Forget about bats and bees now. Think of existing programmes and appliances.
Do you want to kill them?
I do not understand how defining a new, different service on a new
port will kill anything. There is nothing about the existence LLMNR
that would prevent hosts from running Apple's proprietary mDNS
protocol on the existing Apple mDNS port.
I don't think that you have raised any issues here that have not
already been discussed in the DNSEXT WG. If you do have specific
technical objections to the LLMNR protocol, could you re-state them a
bit more clearly so that I can understand what they are?
Thank you,
Margaret
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf