Zero Configuration Networking
The Zero Configuration Networking (Zeroconf) working group of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) has carried the concept of dynamic addressing one step further than DHCP. Like AppleTalk and IPv6, Zeroconf can allocate IP addresses without a server. It can also translate between names and IP addresses without a DNS server. To handle naming, Zeroconf supports multicast DNS (mDNS), which uses multicast addressing for name resolution.
So far, the Zeroconf work has been limited to small networks. Zeroconf is a link-local technology. Link-local addresses and names are meaningful only on a particular network. They are not globally unique. Zeroconf is appropriate for home and small office networks, ad hoc networks at meetings and conferences (especially wireless networks), embedded systems as in an automobile, and whenever two devices need to spontaneously share or exchange information.
Although the main goal of Zeroconf is to make current personal computer networking easier to use, according to the Zeroconf working group's home page (www.zeroconf.org), a long-term goal is "to enable the creation of entirely new kinds of networked products, products that today would simply not be commercially viable because of the inconvenience and support costs involved in setting up, configuring, and maintaining a network."
Zeroconf has many advantages, but one potential risk is that it will interfere with more structured systems for address and name assignments, although the working group does say that Zeroconf "must coexist gracefully with larger configured networks" and that Zeroconf protocols "must not cause harm to the network when a Zeroconf machine is plugged into a large network." Zeroconf has some intriguing features and, as a network designer, you should have some familiarity with it. Zeroconf can solve various problems for small, ad hoc networks, and is built in to some operating systems, including Mac OS X. For more information on Zeroconf, refer to www.zeroconf.org.
Continue reading here: Classless Routing Versus Classful Routing
Was this article helpful?