Slashdot Mirror
Rendezvous, Microsoft And Apple
serendigital writes "MacCentral reports that a BusinessWeek article entitled: 'A Rendezvous with Redmond?' has -- with Rendezvous -- created an actual threat to Microsoft. As reported by MacCentral, it's interesting to note that BusinesWeek's 'Byte of the Apple' columnist Charles Haddad is on temporary leave and this article was written by a substitute columnist."
What the hell are you talking about?
Rendez-Vous is based on Zero-Config, an open-sourced standard.
Apple merely enhenced it a bit and wrote some high-level APIs for even speedier development. But it's just Zero-Config. Rendez-Vous sources are available as all Darwin source code at Darwin.org.
Looks like there are sourceforge projects here and here (although the first project actually has code, and the 2nd looks just like a description.)
Not to mention you can get the "real" rendezvous source here from Apple.
It's not automatic sharing, it's automatic discovery. Rendezvous will tell you that there's a machine providing a particular service on your LAN, but that doesn't necessarily mean you'll be able to gain access to it.
How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
Although wireless networks offer slower bandwidth than their wired counterparts, they do offer one advantage over hard-connected ethernet: they don't suffer from the same saturation problems. While 100 demanding users could quickly saturate a shared 100 MB/S wire, the same users on wireless will not interfere with eachother. Wireless scales much better than you seem to think.
Secondly, a couple hunderd extra broadcast packets aren't going to saturate a 100 base-t network. A packet is tiny. If I do a tcpdump right now, you wouldn't believe the number of broadcast packets flying around here at this moment. My network connnection isn't being adversely affected.
Also, I'd really differ with you that Rendezvous isn't useful in a business setting. Obviously it's not going to replace DNS for the majority of services, but it could seriously simplfy things like, printing, scanning, and maybe even some file sharing. I don't doubt that this technology will find a great place in the home, but it certainly doesn't mean it's useless to businesses. It's worth noting though that Rendezvous is limited to the current machine's local subnet.
Here is a PDF file that explains the technology behind this a little better...but does not go into too much detail regarding security. It sounds like you can choose what you want to share.
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. --Edmund Burke
You'd be surprised how well this actually scales. That is one of the whole points. Rendezvous is a replacement to AppleTalk, and as such one of the major goals is not to saturate the network like other more chatty protocols.
For instance, each host implements an aggressive caching scheme so if one host asks for data, other hosts can learn from its request. There is also an exponentially rising delay between each request, the assumption being a host that has been around a long time will continue to be around a long time. Further, Rendezvous requests are not just like broadcast pings. They have a very well defined (and specific) domain standard in multicast DNS. You could ask only for http servers running over TCP, or only iPhoto sharing servers. This cuts down on the traffic.
Of course, the other problem is the dynamic IP address assignment. It chooses an IP out of a /16 subnet. In short, in order for there to be a high probability of collision there need to be more than 32768 hosts, and even then it'll converge quickly. The Zeroconf spec gives upper bounds on how many hosts should be in a zeroconf network.
The whole idea of this system is to allow small isolated subnets (like a wireless zone) to auto-configure. After the first 20,000 devices, sure you might see some degredation in performance. Of course, imagine an admintaking care of a 20,000 device subnet. They end up like a cross between Jerry Lewis and Christopher Lloyd. If you need more subnets then you link them via a configured host. A proxy-gateway with rendezvous, forwarding only things that matter for this subnet, would be a pretty cool app too.
Zeroconf, especially in the home or small office setting, is really, really useful.
Slashdot. It's Not For Common Sense
Since Rendezvous is based on Zeroconf, here is an paper explaining how to secure a zerconf network. Perhaps this will slow the FUD.
Rendezvous is not just an Apple product - it is on the way to being an Internet standard, with an IETF working group and two Internet drafts in progress - one on Auto configuration of hosts and the other on the Dynamic configuration of IP Addresses.
At the ZeroConf WG meetings I have been to, Microsoft was very much present, so I assume that they are well aware of this technology.
As mentioned, since Rendezvous is based on zeroconf, here is a paper explaining how to secure a zerconf network. Facts vs. FUD. Let the better approach win.
I'm seeing a lot of knee-jerk reactions about Rendezvous and security. People are assuming that because the protocol is about making certain types of network configuration dynamic and simple, it is necessarily insecure. Well, I've got news for you: any type of connection from one computer to another is creating security issues. I mean...duh. Now, clearly using something like the zeroconf protocol is going to require stuff like...passwords and encryption and all the usual nonsense we need to make things secure. Oh, and a competent sysadmin administrating the system. So can we cool it with the frothing?
Now, if someone had some good comments on the security issues involved with the zeroconf protocol itself, I'd like to read about it.
I thought that enabling PC users to get the benifts was almost the point of this kind of thing. Instead of Apple trying to adapt to a Windows standard, everyone uses a standard that Apple knows pretty well how to deal with. Apple can play well with others using an open standard. They aren't the misfit children anymore.
If these Apple press release are anything to go by, then Rendezvous has already made huge headway:
-
TiVo, Brother & Aspyr Announce Rendezvous Networked Products
- Developers Rapidly Adopt Apple's Rendezvous Networking Technology
- Epson, HP & Lexmark Support Apple's Rendezvous Technology
Although already posted in further down, here is Apple's page on Rendezvous. I want to see this technology work, because simplicity is what most people want. If its simple, then people just use the technology and don't notice its there - this is what future computing must strive to do.Jumpstart the tartan drive.
zcip has been available in the kernel for more than a year. Last I looked, it hasn't received a great deal of fanfare. It is an incomplete implementation of the spec. Most of the recent updates have usually dealt with handling incompatibilities with Microsoft's incorrect implementation of zeroconf protocols in Windows.
Remember that Rendezvous is really a packaging of three separate protocols, not just zeroconf. So full Rendezvous support in Linux requires more porting work.
All I have to do to browse a Windows network is click in the box in the Connect To Server Windows - everything comes right up, workgroups/domains first.
That what was all this school was for... to teach us how to solve our own problems. -- janeowit
A lot of the technology behind this seems very cool in nature, but just like AppleTalk (which had many similar zeroconf features) i can't imagine it will scale very well. Although this article would love you to think otherwise, I would imagine this whole thing would have more of an effect on the home market then on the buisiness market. I can see not wanting configure applications on small network, but with all of these broadcast packets i would imagine it would saturate a low speed (read:wireless) network.
Actually, ZeroConf contains many provisions for scalability:
Apple has said that they designed ZeroConf to generate significantly less traffic than AppleTalk.
While they didn't invent zero-conf I believe that the head of the steering committee is and has been a full time Apple employee.
Go out and get sailing!
They tried that, back in the days when Gil Amelio was running things, in case you don't remember.
It almost drove them out of business.
No, Apple's doing exactly what they should, and they're being extremely successful with it.
The thing is, the style of their machines is one of the selling points - it resonates with the art crowd, as well as the very rich, as well as the "I'm totally computer-illiterate and I don't care" crowd who just wants a machine that works. Their hardware isn't cycle-for-cycle competitive with x86 machines, so putting it in ugly boxes and charging less would kill them. End of story.
Take a look at their history sometime. Interesting stuff.