Subject: Comments on draft-ietf-zeroconf-reqts-02

From: Richard Humpleman - SISA <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2000 14:28:53 -0800

>>    A host using a Zeroconf protocol must easily transition in three
>>    ways:
>>    1. from a Zeroconf protocol to a non-Zeroconf protocol,
>>    2. from a non-Zeroconf protocol to a Zeroconf protocol, and
>>    3. from a Zeroconf protocol back to a Zeroconf protocol (possibly
>>      with new values).
>>
>> I think of the wording of the third case doesn't make sense.  I think it
>> makes more sense to say, "ZEROCONF protocols must be prepared to
reconfigure
>> when the network environment changes.  This is a general rule for all
>> ZEROCONF protocols."
>
>Your suggestion is true for all three case. In fact it is a common 
>pre-requisite to any them. Also, the "host" must be prepared, not
>the "protocol". How about this:
>
>Hosts using ZEROCONF protocols must be prepared to reconfigure when the
>network environment changes.  This is a general rule for all ZEROCONF
>protocols. This requires a host using a Zeroconf protocol to transition in
>three ways:
>1. from a Zeroconf protocol to a non-Zeroconf protocol,
>2. from a non-Zeroconf protocol to a Zeroconf protocol, and
>3. a Zeroconf protocol must be able to re-initialize with possibly with new
>   values.
>

Hello Myron,

Is the intention of the writing here that there is no stand-alone Zeroconf
host ie all Zeroconf hosts must support the office-LAN-config? For example
an internet alarm clock or toaster that will never be taken to the office
must still include DHCP client?

Is a Zeroconf host = (Zeroconf + Office-LAN-config) host?

If so maybe we shouldn't call it Zeroconf (call it Multiconf instead?) or
take out the requirement for the office protocols?

Thanks,
Richard Humpleman,
Samsung.

---

From: Daniel Senie <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2000 17:49:16 -0500

> must still include DHCP client?

I would argue that YES, you have to be able to handle being DHCP client.
At least some users, EVEN HOME USERS, will have networks large enough
and complex enough to be running DHCP and want to be able to still talk
to their alarm clock and toaster.

> Is a Zeroconf host = (Zeroconf + Office-LAN-config) host?

The issue here is whether the case where DHCP or other config is in use
is necessarily an "Office." I disagree (as stated above) with that
assessment.

If you build a device which cannot handle transitioning to a configured
case, then how do you have that device function on a LAN with devices
that DO transition? The user workstations are not necessarily capable of
communicating using multiple IP addresses, one zeroconf, one assigned.
If we went to IPv6 this would be less of an issue, since there is
provision in IPv6 for multiple IP addresses on a node and site-local
addresses.

While SOME systems using IPv4 will handle multiple addresses, many will
not. I don't think it's a reasonable requirement that Zeroconf systems
be able to handle multiple IP addresses (and figure out which one to
use) to accomodate devices which don't handle the transition case.

> take out the requirement for the office protocols?

I guess I thought the goal was to allow devices to function when no
master config server or human configuration is performed. That devices
still need to be able to function in the case where someone does
configure addresses or a config server is present is, I hope, assumed.

Just my two cents on the issue...

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Senie                                        [email-masked]
Amaranth Networks Inc.            http://www.amaranthnetworks.com

---

From: "Myron Hattig" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2000 23:47:44 -0800

Hi Richard,

Daniel's response represents my understanding of the common thinking. I also
agree with these thoughts because many home networks will have DHCP servers.
I hope to advance a solution that does not require a DHCP server in a home
network, but IMHO it would be impractical to have an IP host config ZC
protocol that does not operate in the presence of a DHCP server. Also, I
think it would be equally impractical to build a product that did not
operate in the presence of a DHCP server.

-myron

---

From: Paul Ferguson <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 12:21:10 -0500

>operate in the presence of a DHCP server.

I concur.

- paul