Subject: mDNS/LLMNR and "local.arpa"

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 22:58:33 +0900

(thread from zeroconf mailing list.  see
	http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/zeroconf/msg00604.html
	and emails before that)

>if there's no intent to support use of DNS names or DNS-like names,          
>and the group is willing to NOT overload existing name lookup APIs,           
>I'd like that to be stated explicitly and up-front.  it simplifies            
>a number of problems, but it also makes zeroconf incompatible with
>existing programs - so I have my doubts that this is the intent.

	then why "local.arpa" was removed from mDNS/LLMNR document?  indicators
	like "local.arpa" or "local" (used by Apple Rendezvous) is a good
	indication of different name space.

itojun

--
to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>

---

From: Robert Elz <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2002 13:22:27 +0700

Date:        Fri, 13 Sep 2002 22:58:33 +0900
    From:        [email-masked]
    Message-ID:  <[email-masked]>

  | 	then why "local.arpa" was removed from mDNS/LLMNR document?  indicators
  | 	like "local.arpa" or "local" (used by Apple Rendezvous) is a good
  | 	indication of different name space.

No, mangling the names is a poor way to indicate different name spaces.

And that's for much the same reasons that my suggestion to stick the
scope id of IPv6 limited scope addresses (LL & SL) inside the address
itself (as part of the API) was rejected (and I agree now, rightly so).

kre

---

From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2002 03:23:57 +0900

>No, mangling the names is a poor way to indicate different name spaces.

	then how can we differentiate mDNS/LLMNR name and DNS name under
	the same API (getaddrinfo/getnameinfo)?

itojun

---

From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2002 13:27:04 +0900

>LLMNR names are not DNS names. They are not authoritative for the same
>namespaces, and they shouldn't be mixed.
>
>How do you already multiplex DNS/NetBIOS/NIS/etc under a single API? Why
>should this be different?

	i don't quite parse it.  are you against the use of local.arpa, or
	are you for the use of local.arpa?
	DNS and NIS names (and /etc/hosts) are accessed via single API
	(gethostby*, getaddrinfo/getnameinfo), so it makes sense to use
	the same API.

itojun

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 00:18:36 +0900

>One could envision new flags (such as AI_LLMNR) for lookups in the local
>name space.

	that is certainly one possibility, but why do we need it when we don't
	have AI_NIS?  AI_LLMNR removes transparency (of LLMNR) to the
	application.

itojun