Chris,
> On Jun 11, 2024, at 7:13 PM, Rizzo, Christopher <christopher.rizzo at xerox.com> wrote:
>> Of course - I just thought of what happens when there is a name conflict with another device on the network, and tested it.
> The conflict caused the registered name via MDNS to have "(2)" appended to it, but neither printer-name nor printer-dns-sd-name were updated to match.
> So now I'm wondering if that is a bug. Is that a bug? I think that is as I read PWG 5100.13 - printer-dns-sd-name at a minumum should have changed to match the MDNS (updated) registered name.
Yes, printer-dns-sd-name should update to the current DNS-SD Service Instance Name.
________________________
Michael Sweet