- From: Frederick Hirsch <w3c@fjhirsch.com>
- Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2014 11:04:52 -0400
- To: W3C APIs WG Device <public-device-apis@w3.org>, public-web-and-tv@w3.org
- Cc: Frederick Hirsch <w3c@fjhirsch.com>, Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>, ext Pascale Giuseppe <giuseppep@opera.com>, matt.hammond@bbc.co.uk
[cross-posted intentionally] Giuseppe, all In April I sent a request to the Web & TV Interest group for feedback related to Network Service Discovery [1]. I believe the essence of the request was captured in your minutes of 16 April [2] and the follow up from Daniel Davis [3], (slightly paraphrased): * Does NSD meet the original requirements? http://www.w3.org/TR/hnreq/ * How much interest and support is there for Network Service Discovery? * Are device manufacturers willing to support CORS in order to enable NSD support? * Are stakeholders willing to work with user agent vendors for implementation? * What changes are needed if any? Matt shared a response [4] that the BBC is "working to ensure CORS support is implemented by HbbTV 2.0 devices for protocols that may be communicated with by companion devices across the home network�. What is the degree of support for this effort, and what time frame is expected? Peter Lanigan of the Smart TV Alliance indicated plans [5] to reference the Network Service Discovery specification. He noted that having both CORS and white-listing addresses security requirements, that it is necessary to have something like this for application developers and that there are proof of concept implementations. I should point out that the editors draft is currently a work in progress, so care should be taken referencing it until the draft advances. I also observed in the minutes the view that browser implementer support may be required (though I note extensions might also be an interim possibility) At this point there is one additional important question to ask: Have you considered alternatives to Network Service Discovery and how much interest are they receiving? In particular, the Named WebSockets proposal [6] offers an alternative that seems to separate concerns cleanly - using ZeroConf to enable name discovery and then WebSockets to communicate once names are established, resulting in a relatively simple specification (Rich can add more if better explanation is needed). Use of names might also help with the issue we�ve noted in DAP related to privacy and exposing local network identifiers. There has also been a thread on the Mozilla browser development list suggesting that building network discovery using a UDP socket approach might be preferable to the NSD specification [7], If anyone has more to add regarding the status of Network Service Discovery with respect to the Web & TV work, or regarding security, adoption and alternatives, please share on the lists. Thanks regards, Frederick Frederick Hirsch, Nokia Chair DAP @fjhirsch [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-and-tv/2014Apr/0025.html [2] http://www.w3.org/2014/04/16-webtv-minutes.html#item02 [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-and-tv/2014Apr/0032.html [4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-and-tv/2014Apr/0033.html [5] shared by Giuseppe, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-and-tv/2014May/0009.html [6] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2014May/0032.html [7] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=914579
Received on Wednesday, 4 June 2014 15:05:28 UTC