AF:
NF:0
PS:10
SRH:1
SFN:
DSR:
MID:<20070425140510.0ccbbb73@ripper.onstor.net>
CFG:
PT:0
S:andy.sharp@onstor.com
RQ:
SSV:onstor-exch02.onstor.net
NSV:
SSH:
R:<dl-designreview@onstor.com>
MAID:1
X-Sylpheed-Privacy-System:
X-Sylpheed-Sign:0
SCF:#mh/Mailbox/sent
RMID:#mh/Mailbox/design review	0	C05F8BA9-B92D-4EE3-A20D-FB93533A7FB0@onstor.com
X-Sylpheed-End-Special-Headers: 1
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 14:05:13 -0700
From: Andrew Sharp <andy.sharp@onstor.com>
Cc: dl-Design Review <dl-designreview@onstor.com>
Subject: Re: [Zonda] Network initial config via WebUI -- system component
Message-ID: <20070425140513.67b9b9fb@ripper.onstor.net>
In-Reply-To: <C05F8BA9-B92D-4EE3-A20D-FB93533A7FB0@onstor.com>
References: <20070424154813.653bd7a6@ripper.onstor.net>
	<83D14009-F5C0-47BE-9522-13B918293AB3@onstor.com>
	<20070425111822.42ab47af@ripper.onstor.net>
	<C05F8BA9-B92D-4EE3-A20D-FB93533A7FB0@onstor.com>
Organization: Onstor
X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.6.0 (GTK+ 2.8.20; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 13:53:56 -0700 Ian Brown <ian.brown@onstor.com>
wrote:

> I'm not sure if we're talking about the same thing, as bonjour does  
> not have some of the problems your are assigning to it.
> 
> 1, Your suggestion, to use a dhcp server, has it's primary value in  
> that we would no longer need console connections to do initial  
> install, you would instead need an ethernet cable, that's great, but  
> has the down side that if you plug this inadvertently into a network  
> with a dhcp server already on it, then you are going to have big  
> problems on that network (what happens when you do 'system config  
> reset' when the gateway is already plugged into a network (as in our  
> lab)?).   So there is a big downside in usability.

That depends on what behavior we assign to that action, and what
interface the dhcp server is listening on, and ...

> 2, (you mention bonjour needs a dhcp server on the customers
> network) --- it does not require any dhcp server, it is a dhcp server
> (of sorts) itself, but it will not conflict with any other dhcp
> server on the same subnet.

I don't believe I said bonjovi needs a dhcp server, no.

> 3, (you mention that customers would not like us willy-nilly  
> assigning IP addresses to laptops and gateways) ---- it does not  
> willy-nilly assign ip addresses, it uses only ip addresses that are  
> already specified for the bonjour protocol (see the RFC), that would  
> not conflict with anything else (even other bonjour devices).
> 
> 4, (you mention it would be substantially more work to implement)   
> ---  How much more work would it be?  The code is open source from  
> Apple under the apache license and already runs on linux.

We might take a look at it for the linux based product, that would
afford the opportunity to take a fresh approach to things.  But it
still has the #6 problem.

> 5.  (you mention it would be only a very, very slight increase in  
> ease of use)  ---  One, bonjour does not have the problem that your  
> suggestion does when plugging into a network that already has DHCP
> on it.  Two, there are many more possible ease of use issues than
> just getting rid of a console connection, with bonjour would would be
> able to get a list of all the gateways on your network at any time,  
> besides just at initial-config, sort of like how the
> windows-explorer automatically finds cifs shares on a network.  This
> makes working with machines in our lab much easier.  Also using
> bonjour, at sometime could be configured to be extended such that
> gateways would be able to discover themselves and the web gui could
> offer a self- discovered list of gateways that are available for
> clustering. things like this.
> 
> 6. (you mention that customers may not want us putting a laptop on  
> their network)  ---  why would that be needed?

Well, we would need some machine that is bonjovi-capable to make use of
it, so should we count on the customer having such a machine handy, or
should we make sure it's handled by bringing a laptop that has the
stuff on it already?  Or should we make the customer install and
configure it on one of their systems?

> ian
> 
> On Apr 25, 2007, at 11:18 AM, Andrew Sharp wrote:
> 
> > There are two reasons not to bother with bonjour: one, it is a
> > french word, which is reason enough; and second, it's substantially
> > more work to implement for a very, very slight increase in ease of
> > use.  I want this to go into post-Delorean, and we probably don't
> > have time to implement bj in that time frame.
> >
> > The other problem with it is that we would potentially be on
> > customer networks, and there can be problems with it there.  For
> > instance, if they have a subnet on that switch, but no dhcp server,
> > ie., all the addresses are static, they might not like us
> > willy-nilly assigning IP addresses to laptops and gateways.  If
> > they give us some addresses to use, then we have to configure them
> > and there goes the ease of use advantage.  Also, they may just not
> > want us putting a laptop on their network period.  If it was my
> > company (or if I was in charge of IT), I certainly wouldn't allow
> > any random Windows laptops on a company network.  I might not allow
> > any Windows computers on a company network.  Or at least keep them
> > on a quarrantined network.  You just don't know where those things
> > have been or what deseases they might be carrying.
> >
> > Thanks for the ideas -- keep 'em coming.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > a
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 10:57:12 -0700 Ian Brown <ian.brown@onstor.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Andy, it would be even easier if you add support for boujour which
> >> will take your idea to the next level and make it so you don't have
> >> to plug your laptop's ethernet cable directly into the gateway, but
> >> will allow you to do the same thing by just plugging the gateway
> >> directly into the network as it would be normally would be, and
> >> would allow you to configure it that way (via boujour (i.e. dhcp)),
> >> and it would allow you to have any number of gateways plugged in
> >> and still it would work fine, and it would continue to work as an
> >> dynamic dns/ dhcp after it is configured.
> >>
> >> http://developer.apple.com/networking/bonjour/
> >>
> >> Ian
> >>
> >>
> >> On Apr 24, 2007, at 3:48 PM, Andrew Sharp wrote:
> >>
> >>> I've heard that we are going to try and have a WebUI initial
> >>> (install) config thing for Zonda release, so I thought I would
> >>> write up how I think we should make the system level network part
> >>> of that equation happen.  This what I planned to do for Linux
> >>> regardless of how the config was done, rather than use a serial
> >>> port.
> >>>
> >>> I'm asking for RFC at this time.  If there are no objections or
> >>> questions, I'll schedule a meeting if people think it's necessary.
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>>
> >>> a
> >>> <dhcpd_initial_ip.txt>
> >>
> 
