On 3/3/15 19:08 , Stuart Cheshire wrote:
On 3 Mar, 2015, at 17:03, David Farmer <farmer(_at_)umn(_dot_)edu> wrote:
The original wording at least implied some level of interoperability, I'm not sure
"leverage and build upon" does that. It sound more like code reuse is
important rather than interoperability.
REQ5: SSD should inter-operate with current link scope
DNS-SD/mDNS protocols and deployments to the extent
practicable.
I think my answer to the question is bidirectional would be the best case.
But, remember these are competing requirements to be balanced. So, in the worst
case ships-in-the-night meets REQ5 and REQ6.
No, it’s more device reuse than code reuse. You shouldn’t have to buy a new
printer to use it with SSD. Or new network cameras, home thermostats, etc.
Agreed.
No it’s not a bidirectional requirement. It’s unidirectional:
A modern client needs to be able to discover a ten-year-old printer even when
it’s remote.
The ten-year-old printer doesn’t need to discover anything new.
Stuart Cheshire
If possible I'd like both an old client to discover a new printer, as
well as a new client to discover an old printer. That was my
interpretation of bidirectional.
--
================================================
David Farmer Email: farmer(_at_)umn(_dot_)edu
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE Phone: 1-612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 1-612-812-9952
================================================