Just seems like the IETF has tried to address one of our requirements (zero configuration) in the past -- if the IETF has already published proposed standards for zero configuration, why wouldn't we look at this first? Or at least "cherry pick" what we like from this effort.
R. On Mar 10, 2012, at 7:38 PM, Ted Lemon wrote: > On Mar 10, 2012, at 9:19 PM, Randy Turner <[email protected]> wrote: >> it would be unfortunate if the output of the previous IETF "zeroconf" WG >> wasn't put to good use, or if not sufficient, extended. > > Why do you say that? >
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
