On 3/3/15 19:08 , Stuart Cheshire wrote:
On 3 Mar, 2015, at 17:03, David Farmer <farmer@xxxxxxx> 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@xxxxxxx 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 ================================================