On 2013-02-15, at 9:58 PM, kdLucas <kdlucas at google.com> wrote:
> Google has drafted a local discovery specification that is based loosely on mDNS. You may recall we asked for input on this while we were researching which protocol to use.
>> Here is our draft, and we'd appreciate any feedback you may have. We hope to implement this over the next few months so it would help if you provided comments within the next few weeks.
OK, so some specific feedback:
0. Are you also aware of the work in the IETF to extend mDNS beyond subnets?
1. I'm not happy with the name of the "base_url" key; "server", "base", "url"? Shorter is better for TXT records.
2. The "type" key in the TXT record is unnecessary; clients can simply browse for the subtypes they are interested in and correlate using the service name.
3. The "id" key looks like a UUID. If so, it should be documented as such.
4. The "ds" key doesn't really belong here - TXT records don't generally get updated that frequently and typically have a TTL value of at least several minutes.
5. The "cs" key is probably ok since the connection state won't change that often, but I think having an explicit "cs=not-configured" value might be useful?
6. You specifically mention IPv4 link-local, but you also want IPv6 link-local, too, right?
7. How does one provide a job ticket when printing directly to the printer?
Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer, PWG Chair
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...