sorry, I was even more confused than that - I got two message threads from different groups mixed up. please disregard my previous message.
> >actually, SLP seems like a much better fit than DNS for the > >problem of discovering hosts on an ad hoc network - not just > >because SLP is desinged to work without an third-party > >server but also because "service discovery" seems to fit the > >likely use model better than "host name lookup". > > > >in particular, you've got no good way of ensuring unique > >and meaningful host names for hosts on an ad hoc network - > >they can't assert their normal DNS names (even if they have > >such) because such assertions might conflict with DNS, > >or with one another - so it doesn't match DNS "one RRset > >per name" semantics at all. and the very notion of zero > >configuration seems to imply that such hosts don't know > >what their (human meaningful, user assigned) names are - > >they can at most advertise what service(s) they provide > >and their serial #s and let applications look for them. > > you seem to be mixing two things up... > the former paragraph speaks about "discovery of DNS server", the > latter paragraph speaks about "name resolution under environment > without DNS server". > > itojun -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
