Subject: [LL10] applicability statement

From: Keith Moore <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 11:56:52 -0500

I'm not at all sure how the requested change helps or what it's
supposed to accomplish.  But if I understand what is being proposed, it
doesn't read right to me.  If nothing else, the condition that is
suggested is incorrectly formed.  it should not be

(ALL apps can accomodate dynamic addresses) OR (ALL apps have been
modified)

but instead

ALL apps EITHER can inherently accomodate dynamic addresses OR have been
modified to do so

or more succinctly

ALL apps can use dynamic addresses

whether or not this required that they be modified.

Even then, I fear this is missing the point.  It is rare that
networks are built to support only specific applications, and in general
I'd claim that standardizing protocols to support special-purpose
networks is not within IETF's scope.  zeroconf should not claim to
impose a new burden on applications by expecting them to adapt to
dynamic addresses. this is not even feasible in all cases, and the IP
architecture simply doesn't support changing addresses at a whim (even
if you consider LLMNR and/or dynamic DNS part of the solution, which I
don't)

what we need to be saying is that due to ambiguity and stability issues
LL addresses only work well for a subset of applications; that LL cannot
be fixed to work better given the constraint that it be usable
in ad hoc networks and the shortage of IPv4 addresses; that while
some apps will work fine, other apps may or may not be able to work
around these limitations; and as such, that LL addresses should only be
used when stable, routable addresses are not available - such as on ad
hoc, isolated networks.

Keith