Return-Path: 
 <river-dev-return-5234-apmail-incubator-river-dev-archive=incubator.apache.org@incubator.apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-river-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org
Received: (qmail 57492 invoked from network); 8 Nov 2010 00:00:26 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3)
  by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 8 Nov 2010 00:00:26 -0000
Received: (qmail 33254 invoked by uid 500); 8 Nov 2010 00:00:57 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-river-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org
Received: (qmail 33216 invoked by uid 500); 8 Nov 2010 00:00:57 -0000
Mailing-List: contact river-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:river-dev-help@incubator.apache.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:river-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:river-dev@incubator.apache.org>
List-Id: <river-dev.incubator.apache.org>
Reply-To: river-dev@incubator.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list river-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received: (qmail 33208 invoked by uid 99); 8 Nov 2010 00:00:57 -0000
Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 08 Nov 2010 00:00:57 +0000
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=10.0
	tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_NEUTRAL
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy)
Received: from [61.9.168.146] (HELO nskntmtas04p.mx.bigpond.com)
 (61.9.168.146)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 08 Nov 2010 00:00:47 +0000
Received: from nskntotgx04p.mx.bigpond.com ([61.9.223.241])
          by nskntmtas04p.mx.bigpond.com with ESMTP
          id
 <20101108000023.NUID10203.nskntmtas04p.mx.bigpond.com@nskntotgx04p.mx.bigpond.com>
          for <river-dev@incubator.apache.org>;
          Mon, 8 Nov 2010 00:00:23 +0000
Received: from [10.1.1.2] (really [61.9.223.241])
          by nskntotgx04p.mx.bigpond.com with ESMTP
          id <20101108000022.ETKQ6348.nskntotgx04p.mx.bigpond.com@[10.1.1.2]>
          for <river-dev@incubator.apache.org>;
          Mon, 8 Nov 2010 00:00:22 +0000
Message-ID: <4CD73C34.4010800@zeus.net.au>
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2010 09:54:28 +1000
From: Peter Firmstone <jini@zeus.net.au>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080531)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: river-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Discovery - Denial of Service and DNS-SD
References: <4CD64D9A.40904@zeus.net.au> <4CD67C1D.5070404@qcg.nl>
 <4CD68E18.4060504@zeus.net.au> <4CD6A09E.2050000@qcg.nl>
 <4CD70249.2020502@zeus.net.au> <4CD70592.2050007@qcg.nl>
 <4CD70826.3070906@zeus.net.au> <4CD70E98.5050504@qcg.nl>
 <4CD715C6.7020409@zeus.net.au> <4CD72148.2000903@qcg.nl>
In-Reply-To: <4CD72148.2000903@qcg.nl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-RPD-ScanID: Class unknown;
 VirusThreatLevel unknown, RefID str=0001.0A150201.4CD73D96.0112,ss=1,fgs=0
X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org

Sim IJskes - QCG wrote:
> On 11/07/2010 10:10 PM, Peter Firmstone wrote:
>> The reason to avoid V1, is mostly due to it's unicast implementation, it
>> has no privacy integrity or authentication ability and uses
>> MarshalledObject's serialized form, over which we have no control.
>
> I was talking non-sense. V1 has an array as well. I'm talking about 
> the "Protocol Version 1 Announcement Packet Format", if we insert DNS 
> data in the same place as this packet, would the discovery stay V1, or 
> will it upgrade to V2?
>
> Gr. Sim
>
>
The discovery protocol is relevant to unicast, so perhaps we should 
specify it too.

TXT keys:

txtvers=<8 bit byte version number of the DNS-SD TXT record format>
dpv=<8bit byte discovery protocol version number>
sid=<128bit hash code service ID>
grp=<comma separated list of group names to which the service belongs>

Cheers,

Peter.