4 ms·

I'll second this. UPnP is wisely considered a bad idea and a security liability. mDNS usually just works and has been the foundation for several successful cons

I'll second this. UPnP is wisely considered a bad idea and a security liability. mDNS usually just works and has been the foundation for several successful consumer platforms including Chromecast

throwway120385 2y ago
As someone who has used mDNS professionally, it did indeed just work.
Spivak 2y ago
Where are you getting reliable mDNS? I love the protocol on my own devices but good lord the Google Home ecosystem is terrible. Playing audio through multiple speakers at all, forget getting them in sync, is an exercise in frustration. And when I check by scanning mDNS it's always hung getting no responses from devices I know are there. The literal Chromecast itself seems to be exceptional device that just works.
- ZeroCool2u 2y ago
  That's interesting, my google home devices always play audio in sync and seem to just work.
- sgt 2y ago
  Been using mDNS for years in the Apple ecosystem. Never had issues, except maybe 5-6 years ago with AirDrop but been rock stable since. Using airdropping, sharing screens, printing, audio, all kinds.
- btreecat 2y ago
  You might have an issue with your router
mananaysiempre 2y ago
> UPnP is [...] a security liability UPnP generally or just UPnP IGD (frequently referred to as “UPnP” in consumer router UIs)? I’d imagine the primary reasons a smart speaker would want to use UPnP are largely unrelated to punching holes in firewalls and NATs (what IGD is about). And however distasteful RPC over XML over jury-rigged HTTP over IP multicast may be, it’s hardly inevitable that it must create a security problem. Even if we’re speaking about holes, though, I feel like I must object to the broad description of that function as a security vulnerability, as any instance of that moves us that much farther away from a true peer-to-peer Internet.

4 ms·

I'll second this. UPnP is wisely considered a bad idea and a security liability. mDNS usually just works and has been the foundation for several successful cons

by packetlost 2y ago

I'll second this. UPnP is wisely considered a bad idea and a security liability. mDNS usually just works and has been the foundation for several successful consumer platforms including Chromecast

throwway120385 2y ago
As someone who has used mDNS professionally, it did indeed just work.
Spivak 2y ago
Where are you getting reliable mDNS? I love the protocol on my own devices but good lord the Google Home ecosystem is terrible. Playing audio through multiple speakers at all, forget getting them in sync, is an exercise in frustration. And when I check by scanning mDNS it's always hung getting no responses from devices I know are there. The literal Chromecast itself seems to be exceptional device that just works.
- ZeroCool2u 2y ago
  That's interesting, my google home devices always play audio in sync and seem to just work.
- sgt 2y ago
  Been using mDNS for years in the Apple ecosystem. Never had issues, except maybe 5-6 years ago with AirDrop but been rock stable since. Using airdropping, sharing screens, printing, audio, all kinds.
- btreecat 2y ago
  You might have an issue with your router
mananaysiempre 2y ago
> UPnP is [...] a security liability UPnP generally or just UPnP IGD (frequently referred to as “UPnP” in consumer router UIs)? I’d imagine the primary reasons a smart speaker would want to use UPnP are largely unrelated to punching holes in firewalls and NATs (what IGD is about). And however distasteful RPC over XML over jury-rigged HTTP over IP multicast may be, it’s hardly inevitable that it must create a security problem. Even if we’re speaking about holes, though, I feel like I must object to the broad description of that function as a security vulnerability, as any instance of that moves us that much farther away from a true peer-to-peer Internet.