Slashdot Mirror
Apple Releases Rendezvous for Linux, Java, Windows
mblase writes "Apple released yesterday a developers preview of their Rendezvous technology for Windows, Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris and Java. Rendezvous is an open protocol which uses industry standard IP protocols to allow devices to automatically find each other without the need to enter IP addresses or configure DNS servers."
Reader xxdarkxxmatterxx adds a link to a story at Macworld about the release."
THIS is one of the reasons I'm prepared to pay a premium for Apple kit.
Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
Umm... Is it just me, or does this seems to be a little bit of a shot across the bow of Microsoft? Here we have Apple giving something to the community that will add some seriously cool networking capabilities, capabilities the likes of which have traditionally fallen within the realm of the OS itself. At the very least this takes away the ability for MS to use something like this for a "New in Longhorn!" marketing point.
I can't imagine that this makes MS particularly happy, but there's certainly not much they can do about it. Rendevous is seriously a cool technology, and I'm glad Apple decided to release it before MS came up with something similar but incompatible (and, of course, under their control).
Admittedly this argument could be made for Solaris, etc. But I would imagine those communities welcome this addition, whereas I would imagine MS to be a bit colder to the idea.
In any event, kudos to Apple.
Following the link to the developer site we find that:
Rendezvous requires that devices implement three essential things. These devices must be able to
allocate IP addresses without a DHCP server
translate between names and IP addresses without a DNS server
locate or advertise services without using a directory server
ok...
Now I don't have to switch to a Mac to have a machine that "just works" on my company's mostly-Mac network!
The CB App. What's your 20?
to release more home electronics type products. After all why would they need Rendevous on non-mac platformsm, unless they were planning on selling a networking device that hooks up to the home network? (like, say, a digital video device or some other home theatre component)
------- Oh damn.... the Sigfile escaped... -Great OM
...it works better than SIP... I'm trying a local VOIP (over broadband) trial from a local ISP and it' s not working too well. I read up on SIP and found it could be my router's type of NAT munging the communication. Then again, it's a Cisco 186 ATA and I've heard Vonage dumped this piece of equipment for something else...
FLR
for A = 0 to 255
for B = 0 to 255
for C = 0 to 255
for D = 0 to 255
ping A.B.C.D
if (there was a response) then store A.B.C.D in list Q
next
next
next
next
print list Q
"A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
The only stuff I want to have interconnect is my stuff to my other stuff, not your stuff to my stuff. I'd rather see a simple-to-config protocol than a zero-config autodiscovery protocol.
-PM
500GB of disk, 5TB of transfer, $5.95/mo
Sounds like sort of an advanced DHCP. Is this for implementation on an IPV6 or standard IP4 network? Does it include building routing tables between objects as well? Maybe someone can explain it better than I understand it.
...Standards based computing! Pfft. Hmmmm..how many RFCs address this issue?
Blar.
...was started way back when.
Since there are now native service implementations available, it'd probably be better to just hook into those using Ruby/DL or some such...
The Army reading list
Now if they would just release Quicktime for Linux. It would be really nice to have Quicktime for Java for Linux as well.... Just a thought if they are open sourcing things or at least releasing software for Linux in any form.
I'd definitely be interested in trying this out...it'll be nice to see if it can simplify the currently convoluted procedure I have to undertake to do anything on my home network.
When friends come over and want to connect, it can get pretty hairy.
Damn, now I want my AirPort Express *really* bad!Just once I'd like someone to call me 'Sir' without adding 'You're making a scene.'
I cant wait for my network to fill with UDP broadcasts!
This is basically how system-linked xboxes work.
It's cute for little networks that consist of an apple, a printer and an ipod, but it doesn't scale well.
I like my dhcp, that I can control based on MAC addresses.
But kudos to Apple for opening this source. They really had to, you know, one thing they desperately have to overcome is the awkwardness of mixing Mac's and PCs on the same network.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Rendezvous/ZeroConf is basically Appletalk for IP. While Appletalk had its shortcomings, it was awesome for setting up small networks. Just plug + play, no DNS/DHCP/etc BS to worry about. Appletalk's gone the way of the dodo, replaced by this (which works on an IP network).
I have a feeling this will be implemented into standard Linux use real fast. Having this technology for every platform will really help portability of hardware I think too. This is going to be another one of those things that Windows implements but does it horribly unstable so no one can really use it.
Whoever dies with the most toys wins.
I'll be brushing up on my bullet dodging and slo-mo skills and suggest all of you do too.
An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
Sweet! My PC just found my Microwave!!!
/home/daringone#setmwave 1m
/home/daringone#startmwave
/home/daringone#
/home/daringone#
Microwave set to 1 minute
Your food is cooking.
Your food is done.
DHCP is real useful when you don't have a DHCP server on the network....yeah....uh-huh
"Rendezvous technology is now available on Windows 2000 and XP. This preview release includes full link-local support, allowing Windows machines to discover advertised HTTP and FTP servers using Internet Explorer"
Given that Apple today joined the announcement with Mozilla and Opera of open-standards for web plugins it surprises me that their product even suggests the use of Internet Explorer.
I freely admit to hoping, someday, for Safari on Windows and using Firefox until that day (And pls don't reply saying Safari is on Windows in iTunes.. iTMS on Windows doesn't use Webcore, more's the pity.)
I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
Ever join a network and need to send a file to a printer (or another computer) on that network? That was one of the great things about Appletalk - no config (in most cases), just plug + play. Rendezvous/ZeroConf is like Appletalk for IP networks.
A cursory examination of some of their documents seems to indicate the plan involves what they're calling DNS-SD (DNS-based service discovery) which is a way of encapsulating device id and configuration information within DNS records, and specifically making use of special conventions for TXT data.
If this is the case, it seems a pretty clever and resourceful approach.
Then again, this will make DNS servers the main entry point for discovering information about networks, especially information that might normally not be publicly available.
Personally, I like this approach because far less people have access to manage detailed DNS data and may actually be able to manage these things effectively, but there's also a ton of people out there who have insecure DNS information and adoption of this approach among those admins who haven't secured their networks might create an even bigger security problem.
given this is one of the fundamental technologies used for discovery and saring data in itunes, i am surprised it took them so long to release it. It also means that people can write more itunes compatible players (hint to all those linux itunes knockoffs). compatible in the sense that it will appear as a avaiable share and will see other shares on the network. Now all we need is an icaht compatible chat client so that people on a lan do not need a central server to IM :).
It will also be interesting to see how this is applied node discovery in existing p2p systems like gnutella
The war with islam is a war on the beast
The war on terror is a war for peace
How about YOU implement DHCP, if it is so vital to you? Mr. Jobs DID just open the code base, after all, in part for that very reason.
I mean honestly - you whine that it needs to be open so you can code the changes you need, and then you whine when it's finally opened because it doesn't have the features coded for you in advance?
Darn. Scooped again.. . Note that this technology is NOT Apple's. It's the result of the ZerConf Group. Apple just took the idea and made it 'just work'. And yes, it sounds interesting, and a little scary that all them UDP packets will be whizzing around. OTOH, the reduction of ICANN and other DNS 'gods'is one of the nice benefits of P2P technology like ZeroConf.
For anyone who is interested, Rendezvous is Apple's implementation of of ZeroConf
While Apple's Rendezvous overview gives some decent information, the ZeroConf site provides a lot of good technical resources.
Apple really needed ZeroConf as they transitioned to all-IP networking. Although OS X supports AppleTalk, the AppleTalk protocol has clearly seen it's day and the world is clearly moving to IP-only. Previously, when Macintosh machines were largely communicating via AppleTalk, all of the things that ZeroConf addresses were handled by the AppleTalk protocol suite (service discovery, address allocation, etc), and this ease of use that is signature to the Macintosh is important for Apple to maintain.
That said, Apple releasing this code is pretty significant, as aside from this project, there hasn't been much use of ZeroConf in the wild.
bash-3.00$ uname -a
SunOS panda 5.10 Generic sun4u sparc SUNW,Ultra-2
The biggest problem with Appletalk were the stupid cables which used a DIN type connector, which would never stay connected.
(S(SKK)(SKK))(S(SKK)(SKK))
Not really that interesting, but there is an ongoing dispute over the name Rendezvous.
You can read a little about it here
The best is the enemy of the good
I know the standards our open for us to see, but the techniques used seem to be patentable. I think a concept like this (in order to be successful) would require a solid understanding of who plans to lay claim to the IP.
Your monitor is staring at you.
We've launched this only a few weeks ago: Pocketster. It contains an implementation of Rendezvous for the Pocket PC and it also gives you wireless filesharing capabilities (we have a new version coming out on July 6th). It's free, so give it a try if you want (that is if you have a Pocket PC). Also, you might want to check JmDNS (Java version of Rendezvous) and Howl for a Windows implementation. Razvan
Several times I've had the need to print something while in an unfamiliar network. It takes just a few seconds to find and send a job to a printer using Rendezvous. At first it seems ludicrously easy, like it won't actually work. But it does.
In a laptop-centric world, Rendezvous makes life a lot easier.
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
Microsoft has netbios as well which announces computers/printers on a network by UDP broadcasts. So why do we need this software again?
Have you ever been to a turkish prison?
Universal PlugNPlay is actually based upon a preleminary spec of the ZeroConf protocol. Both of then do support the IPv4 link local address (169.x.x.x) and thats it.
For the first time ever, I recently came up with a problem that could be solved rather nicely with something like Jini or Rendezvous. Until now, Rendezvous meant "OS X only", and obviously would be much less usable in the real-world than Jini, which is Java-based.
I think it will be interesting to see if Rendezvous can really fly (I would like to see it succeed). I doubt we'll see apps like Hydra (Rendezvous-enabled text editor) on any OS other than OS X, but maybe we'll see other cool apps that leverage the flexible networking technology of Rendezvous.
If I'm not mistaken, Apple already released source code for at least part of Rendezvous in their MDNSResponderPosix project (I use it to advertise my Linux-based iTunes server to my Mac and Windows-using neighbors). Additionally, the Howl project (another implementation of zeroconf) has some Rendezvous-compatibility features.
:) The only reason for Apple atempting to break DAAP interoperability that I can think of is to enforce the 5-connections maximum present in iTunes. Either that, or they may be trying to maintain a competive advantage over Windows Media Player, I suppose.
Anyway, when I was setting up that iTunes server, I found it very strange that Apple was so generous with Rendezvous, and yet they jealously gaurd DAAP (their music sharing protocol) such that I had to make use of the reverse-engineered implementation in daapd. Furthermore, they made compatibility-breaking changes when they released iTunes 4.5. Incidentally, I updated to the version of daapd that was released upon cracking the new protocol, and I was the only person in my building serving both iTunes 4.2 and iTunes 4.5 hosts.
Anonymous Luddite: "What do you think of the dehumanizing effects of the Internet?"
Andy Grove: "Not Much."
This is not really new. There was an article in the german IT magazine c't recently, which resembled mostly what is in several hints like this one. It's about using Rendezvous on a Linux box combined with a streaming server for iTunes. Works great and is real good fun!
This sig is stolen from someone who had a much better idea than I had.
Which had nothing to do with Appletalk (a bundle of protocols) but a lot to do with Localtalk (a hardware standard).
I mean, if you've got a network I assume you've got a proper router/NAT device...right?
So you've already got a centralized DHCP server that doesn't need configuring! Just plugin in your computers! Then, browse Your Network for all the other computers with shared devices....
What do we need this for again?
Blar.
I thought this was already open, how does this differ from apps that have been out for some time like HOWL [http://www.porchdogsoft.com/products/howl/]
This sounds allot like apple's dashboard, and how it's a direct rip of Konfabulator!
Don't jump on me too hard, I run Linux (so I look fwd to using this) and i also run OSX on an ibook.
PCBWSEF
free ipod and free gmail!
I wouldn't call UPNP "superior" by any stretch of the imagination.
Comparisons have been done. I'd rather have low traffic and better service separation vs the "use-http-for-everything" strategy.
I only had time for a quick check of the www.uspto.gov), but I found this: Patent 6,532,217
Your monitor is staring at you.
Could it be that Apple is trying to alleviate the need for the oh-so-evil microsoft network protocols?
The Jabbers!
Apple continues to surprise me with their interest in designing software that is compatible for the Windows platform in addition to their own (and in this case, also Unix and GNU/Linux). While from Microsoft, they have typically steered to their flagship products and rarely ported them (with the exception of Office and IE) to other OSes.
Even as a frequent Windows user I have great respect for Apple and find their software for Windows actually crashes less then Microsoft made software(!). In addition, they are rarely so deeply entrenched in the OS that if you wanted ot change extension preferences it doesn't fuss as much.
I'd be interested in trying out this new technology and I'm sure it will make it big hit on all network sizes. Good thing for Apple that they released the specs before MS could claim any competing service! Let's all give some positive input to see this software hit new limits!Heh. So you install Rendezvous servers on every box to avoid having a DHCP server? And what do we do when a security hole is found in Rendezvous? See all of our boxes get rooted, that's what.
This "protocol" basically combines several different pre-existing protocols. It seems most like a combination of Auto-IP addressing and SLP. The thing is that OS X and several other OSes including Netware and Linux already use SLP. Now Apple wants everyone to change again?
Here's the really strange part. With SLP, unless you do static configurations, the requests are sent via multi cast. This creates an issue because most routers are not configured to handle multicasting so the SLP scope is limited to the local segment.
Apple's new protocol relies on multicast DNS where, DNS requests are sent via multicast. But, the problem with multicasts being restricted to the local segment still exists. This means that Rendezvous offers no clear advantage over SLP, an already defined and implemented standard. So, why should anyone adopt Rendezvous?
I think you're right. My pointless speculation is that next gen iPod minis will be remote controls for Airport express enabled networks. Not just AirTunes - though that alone would be kickass - but also all your tiger widgets, DVD player, TiVo, and who knows what other home appliances. I'm not sure I really need to be able to turn on the toaster by fingering my iPod, but it would be a damn cool gimmick nonetheless....
zeroconf has been around since 1999, just like UPNP
And this from Apple's website:
NT Migration Tool Tiger Server makes it a snap to upgrade your aging Windows NT network to a Mac OS X server. The new NT Migration Tool automatically extracts all of your user and group account information from an existing Windows Primary Domain Controller and moves it into Open Directory. Tiger Server can then take over as your Primary Domain Controller for your Windows clients and even host your Windows users' home directories, group folders, roaming profiles and shared printers.
So they're making it easier for NT users to migrate their network over to Tiger when it is released. And now this Rendesvous news. Sounds like Apple is quite serious about wanting to be a player in the enterprise server market if you ask me.
"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts...for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang
UPNP is as old as zeroconf and is no more mature than it. Zeroconf is clean and pluggable. It's the published services that may or may not be mature, such as finding web servers, other people to chat with, or another machine with distcc.
People are bashing it here because zeroconf is a small traffic (multicast DNS) linux/OSS technology and UPNP is a high traffic (SOAP aka XML over HTTP) microsoft technology designed to push people to using SOAP everywhere.
zeroconf is rendezvous and vice versa. don't forget
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
"Both of then do support the IPv4 link local address (169.x.x.x) and thats it"
I don't know if you are saying that's all that is the same between them, or if that's the only IP range (which isn't even right - it's 169.254.x.y) that they support.
I have Rendezvous working on three different networks of different scales, all of which are using DHCP to allocate addresses in the 10.254.254.x, 192.168.50.x, and 172.18.x.y ranges respectively. I can go to a Mac and try to connect to afp://server.local on any of those networks, and it gives me an authentication dialog.
MDNS and DNS based service discovery are not bound to any IP range, as they are layer 4 services, and IP is layer 3.
Link-local addressing only exists in Rendezvous for when you need it, not for a requirement.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
Some people *do* use # as their prompt terminator when they aren't root, you know.
Perhaps the Widnows or Java code is new, but I've been using the same linux code they have available for some time in our office to announce the presence of printers and netatalk servers to Macs. I've been using a version of this since sometime last fall, and I downloaded the current downloadable version several weeks ago, so at least the Linux version isn't a new release.
Lovely, yet another protocol that will be chatting across my network. You all remember WINS. Survey says this seems to be another noisy shouting match to allow my users to share crap instead of working. Which port do I block? Ack!!!!!
Uh, okay, but I'm not sure how that backs up your case. In fact, what they claim is an algorithm that will, in all essence, create a ping storm on a network.
I remain under-whelmed.
IANAL, but I've seen actors play them on TV
No, the hardware standard was also called "AppleTalk" originally, for maximum confusion.
that's what UPnP does. UPnP HTTP port is open despite any available services.
rendezvous/zeroconf doesn't open ports automatically unless there is a service that's been enabled. Unless you want to count listening as a open port.
because I'm probably not the only person who downloaded the rendezvouz code months ago, compiled it and have been running it on their linux box.
Rendezvouz enabled clients on my home network will find my linux box available over rendezvouz for AFP, FTP, SSH, HTTP and IPP.
Mac users will feel (and have felt for quite some time) right at home on my network.
They were very expensive too. That's why we used phone cable, and one of those DIN to RJ-11 adapters.
It worked great for Spectre VR in the dorm.
Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
so this is still generating more traffic. I will take this old pain in the ass networking over this zeroconf crap. It will degrade network performance. so apple is taking queues from microsft and making things fatter. yeah dhcp, unicast dns, is all old but it is faster, and in my eyes still better... damn this new fangled technology...
Dont we have (open)SLP, DHCP, DNS for IPv4, and statless address assignments (radvd), DHCP, DNS for IPv6 (does OpenSLP work on IPv6 yet?)
Why do we need another standard? All the above work great.
Now all we need is * to support IPv6, and I will be a happy camper
Heh. The only thing this has on UPnP is smaller packets. Whoop-ti-doooo
Blar.
Perhaps this is analogous to the "desktop" concept, and even Apple's implementation of a desktop based on BSD. The network begins to have the intelligence, the tools become untethered, and sooner or later we are running on terminals. It used to be said about the Apple versus Next developers, that the Apple people kept everything on their machines, and the Next people connected with T1s. It's and apt comparison.
Your arguement can be made for Sun, but they also have a vested interest in making the network the computer.
Personally, I'm waiting for Rendevous for WinCE and Palm. I know that the Java version is probably for PDAs, but a native client would be nice.
I have gas, but my car uses petrol.
Microsoft has been in alpha now for a bit with a product called "Windows NCD Technology" (I'm a tester). This is Apple's shot across MS's bow.
From the alpha page, Windows Network Connected Device (NCD) Technology is a comprehensive set of Windows technologies that allow devices on a local network to discover, communicate with, and control each other.
Around the early 90's, Apple developed a prototype operating system called Pink, which they later spun off into a company called Taligent, with the help of IBM and Hewlett Packard. Here is an old article about it and why it was canned. I remember reading something about how former Apple CEO John Scully gave a demonstration to some people of what looked like the Macintosh operating system running on a PC. As I recall it could run on both Mac and PC hardware platforms, and was designed in such a way that programmers could create programs that ran on both platforms through object-oriented programming. I purchased a book on it ages ago in which it was described as an "application system". It was meant to be a true cross-platform operating system.
Rendezvous accomplishes a lot more than dhcp does. In fact, rendezvous works in conjunction with dhcp. While dhcp allows for the automatic assignment of addresses, rendezvous allows for the discovery of the devices themselves, and their associated address. I can easily connect to another machine by using ssh, and connection to other-machines-hostname.local. Of course, this would be easy if you had DNS installed as well, using statically assigned dhcp addresses (bootp). However, anyone that connects into a network that has rendezvous will automatically have a name that resolves. Additionally, it advertises what services are running on those machines that connect, so that I can look at what machines on my network support things like apple file sharing, or ssh, viewing a list in my file sharing program or ssh program, respectively. This is something that you can't currently do without rendezvous.
...to Firevouz. But then I suppose Donald Trump would be upset.
Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
ZeroConf means a visiting professor walks into a lab at a university and can automatically print. There's zero configuration.
It means an iTunes user can broadcast their library on the network and another iTunes user can pick it up with no problem. There's zero configuration.
It means I can open iChat, not go onto AOL's network, and see my coworkers down the hallway with zero configuration.
It means I can share a workgroup document we are editing in SubEthaEdit and easily invite coworkers on the LAN. There's zero configuration
And now it means that non-Mac users can start getting in on a lot of the same stuff.
- Allocate addresses without a DHCP server.
- Translate between names and IP addresses without a DNS server.
- Find services, like printers, without a directory server.
- Allocate IP Multicast addresses without a MADCAP server.
You are quite accurately describing point 3 whereas the parent was describing points 1,2 and 4. But ALL FOUR are rendezvous/zeroconf.zeroconf enabled DHCP server can point you in the right direction. Zeroconf outside of local networks makes no sense. When you ask for all the local printers, you don't want to get every one on the entire frickin internet.
For enterprise wide networks, you zeroconf/rendezvous acquire a DHCP server and a Directory server. From there, they will point you to the rest of the services in your enterprise *outside* of your local network.
Correct multicast switching is not a problem. Do you personally mess with something that intentionally messes up the broadcast address in TCP/IP?
I'll bet you a week's pay...you won't notice a difference.
Blar.
OS X on x86 would share another disadvantage with Solaris on x86 - multithreading. Apps on the Mac usually make quite heavy use of multithreading, which is something that x86 does very badly ...
It's not exactly the same thing, but Mac OS X sucks at multitasking. You can talk all you want, but when my laptop is hammered and I log into it over ssh, I get serious delays. OTOH, when my linux or solaris (both x86) boxes are hammered, I never get delay on the CLI.
I fully agree that Intel's multiprocessing architecture sucks -- shared CPU data buses, no separate instruction buses, all that crap. I fully agree that PPC and Athlons are better. But there's something seriously wrong with OS X's scheduler, and it's pretty gross. I use Macs, I'll continue using them (although only for their laptops until the cases get more expandable -- 2 hard drives? get outta here!), but I'll never use them as my main workstation because they don't like doing too much at one time.
Shot across the bow? Apple has been kicking MS's butt for ages now. Tiger, the next version of OS X, is about to be released with the metadata searching of events, files, emails, etc. that LongHorn wants to introduce in 2006/7. Already, they have lots of nice eye-candy and opengl/postscript accelerated display stuff. Tiger also includes jabber server and client support, seemlessly integrated, along with lots of other finishing touches that Open Source never gets done. Seems they even been GNOME Desktop to releasing the metadata thing, for example, and GNOME probably started first, giving them the idea.
I'll say one thing for apple. They know how to get stuff done. If Linux folks could work in the focused way they do, we'd really be somewhere special now.
While iPhoto and iTunes, etc, can advertise availability of your content using Rendezvous, they can also restrict who can actually use it. There is no problem.
A post from Stuart Chesire (Apple) on including Rendezvous in Fedora here.
Since Linux must be free as in no-cost, there aint any way for Apple to bring useful quicktime *content* to the platform, since stuff you'd want to see is likely encoded in Sorenson or other comercial codec. Better to create your own software for playing back QT content by reverse engineering QT's codecs. QT media files are straightforward to work with, so get started!
Why would you want Apple to bring all that old System 7 code that makes up the current version of QT (on both OS X and Windows)? Better to start afresh, or wait for Apple to bring out a clean version - which may never happen. In any case, Apple couldn't really open QuickTime without losing their technology at little benefit to their marketshare. Big Woop: 1000 Linux desktop users have a way to watch QT movies.
The masses were on Windows, so Apple ported QT there. Linux servers (not desktops) are a sensible market to target, so Apple has provided FREE and OPEN source for their Darwin Streaming Server.
...any smart developer out there want to give a run down on how this differs fron JINI?
I don't suppose there's any way to get a copy of "Pink" is there? It would be interesting to hack around with something like MacOS on a i386-based machine. Probably jsut wishful thinking.
Transistors and Beer!!
You know Windows XP can find printers by magic too? When I was on a dorm network I had a list of about 50 different printers that I never lifted a finger to make. I saw them every time I went to print something.
Tim
Omnia vestra castrorum habetur nobis.
foo$ setmwave --device darignmwave 60m
foo$ startmwave
foo$ echo "hahaha pwned" | mail daringone@daringpc.local
you do *not* want to route something like zeroconf. This would overload your local browsing.
In order to acquire services across networks, you should be using a directory service such as Open Directory on Mac OS X. Zeroconf/rendezvous can acquire their local Open Directory server and then index those services.
Actually, there's one scenario where you *might* see an Intel version of OS X. Apple could, theoretically, get upset with IBM and quit using their CPUs. In this scenario, they don't have much choice other than partnering with AMD or Intel and building new Macs with an x86 architecture.
This, in fact, appears to have been a "plan B" for Jobs up until he struck the deal with IBM - because they weren't getting anywhere fast with the Motorola partnership. If this happened though, I'm sure he'd make an effort to write the Intel version of OS X so it would refuse to run on anything other than a custom Apple-made motherboard. (But as we all know, something like this would just get hacked anyway, so we'd see it on standard Wintel PCs within weeks of its release.)
They found each other because of NetBios, not DHCP. DHCP assigns the network address, subnet, router, and DNS server address(es). It doesn't provide a way to find other systems by name and then get their IP without some other protocol (NetBios, regular DNS, something else).
The primary benefits it has over NetBios is extremely simple implementation (especially if you already have DNS client code around) and not being tied to an MS proprietary protocol which would be much harder to implement in stand alone devices such as print server cards, MP3 players, TiVo type devices, etc.
BC
http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/02/07/Sha redSourceCLI/default.aspx
- This is not Appletalk. IT is new.
- This is open
- The *key* feature is the mDNS system.
- Yes, it does automatic IP allocation if there is no DHCP server.. so does Windows (though apple is much faster at it for some reason).
- mDNS is not to be confused with "The global DNS system" that you use to lookup Address records, etc, though it can do that. mDNS is DNS adapted to multicast, for service and host discovery. HOw?
- Instead of querying a DNS server, you query a multicast group (the link-local group in this case) and say "Who has a webserver?" or "who has ssh?" or "hey FOO, what is your IP?" or.. more importantly "Who is a real internet DNS server?" or "Who has an internet gateway?". "Who else is running itunes?".
- a machine joining the network will broadcast once, to send out that it has joined, and what services it has, also via mDNS... so anyone listening can update their caches, etc. The opposite happens when it leaves.
This does not create an extra burden of traffic. Previous to this, most protocols that need to find something in the network do so by rather rude broadcasts.. and usually generate quite a bit of unnecessary traffic.
YES, having a set infrastructure, DNS servers, DHCP, etc, and using DHCP to hardcode everything else, avoiding the need for local network discovery is more efficient. The point is, this works very well WITHOUT any infrastructure.. like 10 guys sitting in a conference room with wireless cards and no servers... or 3 guys on the bus. etc.
NO, rendezvous does not grant ACCESS to your computer.. it merely discovers advertised services... much like an X browser can find a bunch of remote X desktops, or windows TS can find all the terminal servers in the network, or the "network neighborhood" list is populated in windows. It's just a more elegant, scaleable approach.
- mDNS is *not* dns... it is mDNS but if you understand DNS you will understand mDNS. They chose to not make a new protocol, and instead adapt an existing one... which makes it much easier to learn and work with.
Us with small Windows networks have some of this already. APIPA to get a 169.something.*.* address, and NetBIOS-over-TCPIP broadcasts to resolve machine names. Matter of fact, I get po'ed when I can't find my Knoppix VM when it is running on the same damn machine! Ok, it can't do fqdn names nor SRV. But I am thinking about Metcalf's law; are we going to get it on everything? Seems to me that the newest last protocol to succeed was HTTP. Next-to-impossible or glacial to get new stuff to broad audience ... think about IPv6 (i.e. nowhere).
I used Windows' file sharing because I was getting at an example of something that didn't need a DHCP server, like this rendezvous thing.
I just think this thing is nothing that hasn't been done before or any excuse to get excited.
I also don't think it is the direction we should be headed - in general I find these sort of "serverless" ad hoc setups to be less reliable. From Windows filesharing with no server running it to Freenet to Gnutella, they can be counted on to work most of the time but definitely not all of the time.
On top of that, there's very few places with any sort of network that aren't going to have a DHCP server. Even two computers sharing a DSL line are probably plugged into a Linksys router.
Tim
Omnia vestra castrorum habetur nobis.
A zeroconf DHCP server could do fancier things such as preventing a rogue DHCP server from taking over (see previous Apple security article).
You seem to be confusing zeroconf as a replacement for something more "sophisticated" such as a directory service. This is not the case. A network admin benefits from rendezvous in the following way:
* A machine, new from the box, goes online
* Rendezvous detects the DHCP server and Open Directory (Apple) server on the subnet
* The machine connects to the directory server and receives its configuration from the directory after the user provides credentials.
* The machine is now configured and can access all resources in the enterprise. No network administrator intervention was required.
Zeroconf merely helps computers find the higher-powered services you're demanding. This is how Apple is leveraging the technology.
If your WAN is not subnetted over those slow links, I would think that you shouldn't have designed the network that way to begin with. Seems like it's just asking for trouble. If you *have* to have them talk to each other, the Directory Server can do that by making the disparaging services visible to both sides and rendezvous can help your machine find it.
Thats great, but Rendezvous does automatic discovery too. Thats what you miss. From a developer aspect it handles a lot for you. I don't know about you but Rendezvous comes in handy for me when I do Firewire networking. Just hook two computers together with a Firewire cable, hop on iChat, and you're set for high speed file transfer (or use Rendezvous to mount a share).
No, Rendezvous comes built into the operating system and pre-enabled, so you don't have to install or configure anything. And it's not a serious security threat, because it runs with no privileges. (It runs as 'nobody' on OS X.)
This space unintentionally left unblank.
YEA, now all my devices can choke miserabally as they are constantly broadcasting identification and status flags to eveyone else in the network!
Seriously though- the apple protocol is nice for SMALL networks (no more then lets say 5 devices), and dose make things braindead easy to set up, but there is a cost in that it gets really slow when you start getting lots of devices using it. So if you like it, use it, but be wary of the costs of it's use.
-Millions of Monkeys, Millions of typewriters, 6 hours of sorting through faeces encrusted pages to find: This post
We have an internal network here at work that is about 80%/20% mac/pc. The main laser printer is attached to a mac and shared over rendezvous. My Mac discovered the printer instantly and i print to it all the time. My PC sitting right next to me had this developer preview installed yesterday, and I immediately fired up the rendezvous printer setup wizard. Only to discover that it told me there were no rendezvous printers on the network.
I think the FAQ may have changed - I'm sure Rendezvous was the reason they were putting forward for not making a Windows port about a year ago.
Due to ADC NDA, I'm not sure how much I can say, but if you're interested in Rendezvous for a WAN, you should register at the Apple Developer Connection (free) and access the new Rendezvous information there.
I think the new stuff addresses everyone's concerns....