Subject: [Anima] Zero Configuration Networking (zeroconf)

From: Benoit Claise <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2014 10:28:46 +0200

Dear all,

Some feedback received from the IESG

    If unmanaged networks are in scope, make sure the proponents are fully
    aware of the outcome of the zeroconf WG.

Regards, Benoit

---

From: Laurent Ciavaglia <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 14:23:06 +0200

Dear Benoit, all,

The conclusions of the zeroconf WG are (based on 
http://www.ietf.org/wg/concluded/zeroconf.html):

  * The ZEROCONF WG could not come to a consensus regarding these
    requirements. A ZEROCONF requirements document will not be published
    by this working group.

  * This WG will produce one protocol specification, describing
    automatic generation and assignment of link-local IPv4 addresses in
    environments lacking host configuration (static or using DHCP). The
    document will describe existing practice as well as define
    recommendations for future implementations.

I assume the feedback targets the first bullet point, but how shall we 
interpret that:
-a simple "warning" that the process is not easy and might "fail".
-if someone involved in the zeroconf WG could recollect the technical 
issues that were blocking at that time (or why the process ended this 
way), it would be much helpful.

Thanks, best regards, Laurent.

On 02/10/2014 10:28, Benoit Claise wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> Anima mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima

-- 

Bien cordialement, Best regards,

*Laurent Ciavaglia*

Advanced Internet Research

Bell Labs | Alcatel Lucent

phone: +33 160 402 636

email: [email-masked] 
<mailto:[email-masked]>

linkedin: laurentciavaglia <http://fr.linkedin.com/in/laurentciavaglia/>

address: Route de Villejust | 91620 Nozay | France