From owner-zeroconf@merit.edu Sat Jan 26 03:01:50 2002 Received: from trapdoor.merit.edu (postfix@trapdoor.merit.edu [198.108.1.26]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA03617 for ; Sat, 26 Jan 2002 03:01:50 -0500 (EST) Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) id EBA96912AA; Sat, 26 Jan 2002 03:01:39 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: zeroconf-outgoing@trapdoor.merit.edu Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id B9688912AB; Sat, 26 Jan 2002 03:01:38 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: zeroconf@trapdoor.merit.edu Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93628912AA for ; Sat, 26 Jan 2002 03:01:37 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 9818D5DE6C; Sat, 26 Jan 2002 03:01:36 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: zeroconf@merit.edu Received: from web20603.mail.yahoo.com (web20603.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.226.161]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with SMTP id 030685DDCB for ; Sat, 26 Jan 2002 03:01:36 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20020126080135.16316.qmail@web20603.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [207.18.199.151] by web20603.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sat, 26 Jan 2002 00:01:35 PST Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 00:01:35 -0800 (PST) From: Chandrasekhar Varada Subject: why is zeroconf restricted to a link/ lan segment ? To: ZeroConf@merit.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-zeroconf@merit.edu Precedence: bulk Greetings! I have a basic doubt. Zeroconf link local address draft has a restriction on the packet forwarding, i.e Router should not forward the packets if its source or destination address is a link local address. This restricts the scope of zeroconf to a link and so it cannot be extended to multiple networks or to a corporate network. Is this because, we have DHCP for that? or is there any other specific reason? Thanks for you time, Chandu. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions! http://auctions.yahoo.com From owner-zeroconf@merit.edu Sat Jan 26 05:09:31 2002 Received: from trapdoor.merit.edu (postfix@trapdoor.merit.edu [198.108.1.26]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA04713 for ; Sat, 26 Jan 2002 05:09:30 -0500 (EST) Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) id 42A72912AB; Sat, 26 Jan 2002 05:09:22 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: zeroconf-outgoing@trapdoor.merit.edu Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 165DD912AD; Sat, 26 Jan 2002 05:09:22 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: zeroconf@trapdoor.merit.edu Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EAA2912AB for ; Sat, 26 Jan 2002 05:09:21 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id EF2F45DE4C; Sat, 26 Jan 2002 05:09:20 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: zeroconf@merit.edu Received: from mail-out1.apple.com (mail-out1.apple.com [17.254.0.52]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 741025DDAB for ; Sat, 26 Jan 2002 05:09:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailgate2.apple.com (A17-129-100-225.apple.com [17.129.100.225]) by mail-out1.apple.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id g0QA9JQ04664 for ; Sat, 26 Jan 2002 02:09:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from scv2.apple.com (scv2.apple.com) by mailgate2.apple.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.2.1) with ESMTP id ; Sat, 26 Jan 2002 02:09:19 -0800 Received: from [206.111.147.149] (vpn-gh-1065.apple.com [17.254.140.40]) by scv2.apple.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with SMTP id g0QA9Iw23386; Sat, 26 Jan 2002 02:09:18 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200201261009.g0QA9Iw23386@scv2.apple.com> Subject: Re: why is zeroconf restricted to a link/ lan segment ? Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 02:09:19 -0800 x-sender: cheshire@mail.apple.com x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0v3, January 22, 1998 From: Stuart Cheshire To: "Chandrasekhar Varada" , Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Sender: owner-zeroconf@merit.edu Precedence: bulk >I have a basic doubt. >Zeroconf link local address draft has a restriction on >the packet forwarding, i.e Router should not forward >the packets if its source or destination address is a >link local address. This restricts the scope of >zeroconf to a link and so it cannot be extended to >multiple networks or to a corporate network. > >Is this because, we have DHCP for that? or >is there any other specific reason? You have kind-of answered the question yourself. The point of Zeroconf is to enable IP networking in the absence of traditional supporting infrastructure. We want IP networking to work with just a couple of IP hosts on their own -- no DHCP server, no DNS server, nothing else. If you have more than one link, you need to have some kind of box to connect the two links together. That box is supporting infrastructure. Once you have that box there, it is a small step to also put a DHCP server in it, and other supporting services. The purpose of Zeroconf is not to compete with DHCP and other established techniques that already work well. The purpose of Zeroconf is to to provide a safety net so that product developers can produce software (and hardware) products that can safely that assume IP communication is always available, even in environments where traditional supporting network infrastructure is not. Stuart Cheshire * Wizard Without Portfolio, Apple Computer * Chairman, IETF ZEROCONF * www.stuartcheshire.org