Subject: [Netconf] Adam Roach's Discuss on draft-ietf-netconf-zerotouch-25: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

From: Adam Roach <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2018 14:15:56 -0800

Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-netconf-zerotouch-25: Discuss

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netconf-zerotouch/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks to everyone who worked on this document. I have one concern that I'd like
to discuss before the document is published. It's possible that I'm mistaken
about the way this is intended to work -- don't be shy about telling me I'm
wrong.

§4.2:

>  To use a DNS server as a source of bootstrapping data, a device MAY
>  perform a multicast DNS [RFC6762] query searching for the service
>  "_zerotouch._tcp.local.".  Alternatively the device MAY perform DNS-
>  SD [RFC6763] via normal DNS operation, using the domain returned to
>  it from the DHCP server; for example, searching for the service
>  "_zerotouch._tcp.example.com".

RFC 6763 §4.1.2 defers to RFC 2782 for the structure of DNS-SD records; and RFC
2782 indicates that these are of the format "_service._proto.name". In this
case, "service" is one of the services registered with IANA at
https://www.iana.org/assignments/service-names-port-numbers/
The service "zerotouch" is not registered in that registry, nor does this
document register it there.

Unless I'm confused about the way SRV records are intended to work, this
document needs to register "zerotouch" in the service name table indicated
above.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

§4.2:

>  Please see
>  Section 3.1.3 in RFC4408 for how a TXT record can achieve this size.

Please make this a citation instead of merely a mention of RFC 4408.