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

From: eunsoo at research.panasonic.com (Eunsoo Shim)
Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 09:23:29 -0500

Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote:

> 
> 
>
>  
>
>>-----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. 
>
>  
>
I also agree to the above comment.
It does not seem 'the zeroconf work' is broad enough.
Regards,

Eunsoo