Thanks for the review, Samita. We will try to add some precisions about IoT devices in the next version of the draft. On 2/13/2020 9:31 AM, Samita Chakrabarti via Datatracker wrote: > Reviewer: Samita Chakrabarti > Review result: Ready with Nits > > I have reviewed draft-ietf-dnssd-prireq-04. > > The document is informative and clear with a few editorial nits on section 4.1 > through 4.3. > > I have reviewed from the IoT devices perspective and most likely for the > consumer devices that might be present in the public network and are using > shared network technologies (wireless or wired). The threat model are > applicable to them. Section 3.1 describes implications for wearable and server > related privacy issue. Perhaps a small paragraph might be added in this > section or in the introduction calling out possible privacy and security > threats on personal IoT devices in the public places ( that might act as a > dns-sd client). > > At the same time, considering limited processing capabilities, battery saving > concern considerations, privacy related extra processing of messages from the > dns-sd server should not be mandated for the IoT devices. Depending on the > device capabilities, the feature can be configurable and the user can turn > on/off at their need; additionally some iot devices may not care about the > privacy at all. > > So, a few additional lines on IoT implications for the threat model and yet > flexibility of implementation of the dns-sd IOT client may be mentioned in the > document to clarify the IoT devices in the shared wireless/wired medium. > > -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
