I agree with Alain that we need more input/discussion about using well known addresses for discovery of some services. I think that that will impact most of our networks' architectures.
I know that a lot of ideas have been already described in former DNS Discovery Design Team(s). It seems that we do not all agree on the level of importance of the services to discover (DNS, NTP, Printers discovery...). I have the feeling that following that level, each of us assumes that the automatic discovery solution is allowed to constraint the network in different way (do we need a third party discovery server ? can we allocate a pre-defined address? ...). Each time, one can also argue that DHCP or SLP - protocols already with an RFC status - can achieve those functions. IMHO it is not clear how to progress. DHCP and SLP might be enough. I would be grateful if someone could help me to understand pros and cons of those solutions (DHCP, SLP) vs pre-defined adresses. my 0,02% Luc > De : Alain Durand [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Envoye : mercredi 5 mars 2003 19:30 > > On Wednesday, March 5, 2003, at 10:17 AM, Bill Manning wrote: > > > > > As a co-author of a couple of previous DNS discovery IDs, I would > > have to agree that as postulated, the current DNS discovery work > > has pretty much been OBE. (overtaken by events) > > There have been two distinct BOFs on this idea in the last > five years > > so I don't think another BOF will be very productive. > > Bill, > > Note that I'm not suggesting a bof on DNS discovery mechanism per se, > but a bof on generic service discovery using well known, voluntarily > ambiguous > addresses. > > - Alain. > -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
