>As I understand it, one of three things will happen: > >(1) If the system implements mDNS, the .local domain is treated >specially, so this just goes out as a link-local request. > >(2) If the system implements LLMNR, there will first be a global DNS >lookup for "twiki.local", which will fail. Then, a link-local name >request will be tried. > >(3) If the system doesn't implement any link-local name resolution, >there will be a global lookup for "twiki.local" which will fail. > >So, if people use .local domains on systems that implement LLMNR >instead of mDNS, this can result in lookups for .local in the global >DNS. > >But, given that choices (2) and (3) involve the same interaction with >the DNS, I'm not sure how one can argue that LLMNR makes things any >worse than things would be without it. Perhaps you could argue that >mDNS makes things better, but that is only true for this one >non-existent TLD -- all three systems would generate a bogus global >DNS query if I did a DNS lookup for "isoc.frog". > >Margaret There's one other relevant difference to note here: If you do a DNS lookup for "isoc.frog" you generate a bogus global DNS query. This is true. But... do you habitually do DNS lookups for "isoc.frog"? Well, in case 1 (mDNS), no, because it won't return a useful result, so why keep doing it? In case 3 (conventional DNS), no, because it won't return a useful result, so why keep doing it? In case 2 (LLMNR) the answer is yes, all the time, if you chose to call your printer "isoc.frog", which LLMNR allows and encourages. Stuart Cheshire <cheshire@xxxxxxxxx> * Wizard Without Portfolio, Apple Computer, Inc. * www.stuartcheshire.org _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf