Subject: [p2p-sip] Revised Draft for possible WG charter

From: dromasca at avaya.com (Romascanu, Dan (Dan))
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 12:11:41 +0200

> -----Original Message-----
> From: p2p-sip-bounces at cs.columbia.edu 
> [mailto:p2p-sip-bounces at cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Karst Bjorgson
> Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 9:44 AM
> To: David A. Bryan; P2P-SIP
> Subject: Re: [p2p-sip] Revised Draft for possible WG charter
> 
> > 3. Some elements of each peer association group MAY be rooted in the
> >     DNS such that they can be used for bootstrapping operations.
> >     However, a peer association group that is operating 
> entirely in an
> >     isolated (or disconnected, or autonomous) mode will rely on
> >     alternate means of bootstrapping the peer association 
> group based
> >     on the "zeroconf" work.
> 
> Isn't the reference to the "zeroconf" working group a bit 
> problematic? The group is flagged on the IETF web page as 
> "concluded". Its only result was the publication of RFC 3927 
> (rfc3927) - Dynamic Configuration of IPv4 Link-Local 
> Addresses. While useful, link local addresses are certainly 
> not sufficient for "bootstrapping peer association". The 
> quick fix is probably to just say "... rely on alternate 
> means of bootstrapping the peer association group." (i.e. 
> remove the mention of zeroconf.)
> 

I agree with this comment, 'zeroconf' should be at most mentioned as an
example of 'means of bootstrapping' at most. 

Regards,

Dan