On Jun 5, 2012, at 8:08 AM, Anders Montonen wrote: > On Jun 5, 2012, at 14:16, Peter Stuge wrote: > >> These benefits result in excellent usability, and in practice I think >> the IP address conflict can be solved rather easily - by allowing the >> device's IP address and subnet to be reconfigured manually, e.g. >> through type=vendor recipient=device control transfers, or static >> ARP. (Though AXIS AB may have a patent on the ARP trick, I'm unsure.) > > Aren't these the kind of problems Zeroconf was designed to solve?
Not address distribution. Name resolution, yes, and if you were to build a DHCP client into the device, you'd almost need it. Or IPv6 automatically-assigned addresses. Unfortunately, Zeroconf isn't as well-supported on Windows as it is elsewhere, though it's still quite workable. - Dave ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ OpenOCD-devel mailing list OpenOCD-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openocd-devel
