Well, discussions about DNS Endpoint Discovery are starting to pick up with many folks asking about the positioning of DNS-EPD relative to the other discovery options available. First off, DNS-EPD does not replace UDDI. In fact, it has been designed to complement UDDI in many respects. That is, if UDDI is the Web services yellow-pages -- providing comprehensive categorization of services, DNS-EPD is the white pages -- providing a simple, name-based lookup mechanism. The two go quite well together and are fully capable of co-existing.
With regards to how DNS-EPD relates to WS-Inspection.... work on WS-Inspection is effectively stalled, with no additional work and no plans for additional work at any point in the future. If it becomes apparent that a WS-Inspection style discovery mechanism is still required, we may revisit the spec and move forward with it. For now, however, I think it is safe to say that the plan is to leave it alone. As such, DNS-EPD provides an effective replacement capable of covering many of the same use cases as WS-Inspection.
With regards to Microsoft's WS-Discovery spec, DNS-EPD is targeted at a completely different set of use cases. WS-Discovery is focused specifically on the discovery of Web services in link-local multicast environments where DNS may not be an option. DNS-EPD on the other hand focuses on enterprise and internet scale managed network environments and scenarios within which Web services infrastructure have been deployed and need to be discovered. Completely different set of use cases leads to a different solution.
In short, DNS-EPD has been designed to fill a niche that the other discovery options available did not fill. We feel that that niche is a rather important one to fill. We think customers will agree once they get a good look at the spec and have some time to understand how it fits.