• Configure network of an embedded device

    From pozz@pozzugno@gmail.com to comp.arch.embedded on Tue Sep 5 10:37:43 2023
    From Newsgroup: comp.arch.embedded

    Nowadays many Internet connected embedded devices are controlled by an external proprietary cloud service (for example Sonoff[1] or Shelly[2]).
    The installation in the final destination is very simple to the end user
    that ignores completely all the technical issues:

    1. connect the device to the local Ethernet network (WiFi is slightly
    more complex)
    2. pair his mobile app to the device (QR code or serial number)
    3. start configuring and using

    Most probably the device works with DHCP client enabled, hoping to find
    a DHCP server on the network and receive a suitable IP address to make outcoming connection to the Cloud server. This happens in 99.99% of
    cases and the user is super happy.

    In other situations, if the gadget features a small/big display, the
    advanced user could enter a network configuration menu and set the
    desired configuration (DHCP or fixed IP address). This happens for
    desktop PCs or tablets or similar gadgets (even if the user keeps most
    of the time the DHCP default configuration).

    I'm designian't beng a small embedded device that hasn't a display and c controlled by a cloud system. It will be controlled on the local network through a simple web browser pointed to the IP address of the gadget.
    Indeed, a web server runs in the device.

    I'm thinking to start with a fixed IP address, for example
    192.168.1.123. In 90% of cases the IP address can be used immediately
    (written on a label on the gadget or in the quick start guide) and the
    user could access the web page pointing the web browser to
    192.168.1.123. In cases where the local network isn't 192.168.1.x, the
    user should use a PC configured temporarily with a compatible IP address (192.168.1.124), access the web page and change the network configuration.

    The problem happens when the user wants to install several devices on
    the same network, for example 10 devices. Even if the network is
    compatible (192.168.1.x) with the default fixed IP address
    (192.168.1.123), he should connect one device at a time and change its configuration before connecting another device to avoid IP addresses conflicts.

    So I'm wondering if there's a standard or quasi-standard way to manage
    network configuration of devices on the same LAN.

    The situation isn't so uncommon. IPCams are network oriented devices
    that can be controller by a Cloud service from the manufacturer, but
    mainly from a web page. It usually happens that more than one IPCam are installed on the same LAN.

    For example, Dahua IPCams usually start with the fixed IP address 192.168.1.108. They have a software (Config Tool) that can be used[3] to manage network configuration of multiple IPCams, even if they are
    installed at the same time with the default IP address 192.168.1.108.

    Is it a proprietary solution that uses only Ethernet frames (MAC
    addresses) and not IP packets? Is it a well known protocol that I don't
    know?



    [1] https://sonoff.tech/
    [2] https://www.shelly.com/en-gb
    [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIiI1BIHfms
    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Dimiter_Popoff@dp@tgi-sci.com to comp.arch.embedded on Tue Sep 5 13:43:59 2023
    From Newsgroup: comp.arch.embedded

    On 9/5/2023 11:37, pozz wrote:
    Nowadays many Internet connected embedded devices are controlled by an external proprietary cloud service (for example Sonoff[1] or Shelly[2]).
    The installation in the final destination is very simple to the end user that ignores completely all the technical issues:

    1. connect the device to the local Ethernet network (WiFi is slightly
    more complex)
    2. pair his mobile app to the device (QR code or serial number)
    3. start configuring and using

    Most probably the device works with DHCP client enabled, hoping to find
    a DHCP server on the network and receive a suitable IP address to make outcoming connection to the Cloud server. This happens in 99.99% of
    cases and the user is super happy.

    In other situations, if the gadget features a small/big display, the advanced user could enter a network configuration menu and set the
    desired configuration (DHCP or fixed IP address). This happens for
    desktop PCs or tablets or similar gadgets (even if the user keeps most
    of the time the DHCP default configuration).

    I'm designian't beng a small embedded device that hasn't a display and c controlled by a cloud system. It will be controlled on the local network through a simple web browser pointed to the IP address of the gadget. Indeed, a web server runs in the device.

    I'm thinking to start with a fixed IP address, for example
    192.168.1.123. In 90% of cases the IP address can be used immediately (written on a label on the gadget or in the quick start guide) and the
    user could access the web page pointing the web browser to
    192.168.1.123. In cases where the local network isn't 192.168.1.x, the
    user should use a PC configured temporarily with a compatible IP address (192.168.1.124), access the web page and change the network configuration.

    The problem happens when the user wants to install several devices on
    the same network, for example 10 devices. Even if the network is
    compatible (192.168.1.x) with the default fixed IP address
    (192.168.1.123), he should connect one device at a time and change its configuration before connecting another device to avoid IP addresses conflicts.

    So I'm wondering if there's a standard or quasi-standard way to manage network configuration of devices on the same LAN.

    The situation isn't so uncommon. IPCams are network oriented devices
    that can be controller by a Cloud service from the manufacturer, but
    mainly from a web page. It usually happens that more than one IPCam are installed on the same LAN.

    For example, Dahua IPCams usually start with the fixed IP address 192.168.1.108. They have a software (Config Tool) that can be used[3] to manage network configuration of multiple IPCams, even if they are
    installed at the same time with the default IP address 192.168.1.108.

    Is it a proprietary solution that uses only Ethernet frames (MAC
    addresses) and not IP packets? Is it a well known protocol that I don't know?



    [1] https://sonoff.tech/
    [2] https://www.shelly.com/en-gb
    [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIiI1BIHfms


    I had the same issue some 15 years ago and I think I posted a similar
    question here. Back then the "IoT" phrase was not invented, so I am not
    sure if our netmca belongs... :) ( http://tgi-sci.com/tgi/nmca3.htm )

    Anyway, the world has not changed much since, same issue same possible remedies.
    My initial one - which is still active on our devices - was to post
    the IP address on a specific web address under our domain once the
    device boots (it does so via ftp to a dedicated account we have
    for that); the address contains the device serial number which
    makes it specific, the user can locate it using a browser.

    Nobody uses it. They all call before they even try to use that.

    So we started shipping a router with each device; the router is set
    to give fixed IP addresses to each of the devices we ship to
    that customer (sometimes they are more than one).
    This has worked fine. Even if they try to stray from the router
    we have shipped they can verify things work with it and dig
    further themselves, look for help locally etc.

    ======================================================
    Dimiter Popoff, TGI http://www.tgi-sci.com ====================================================== http://www.flickr.com/photos/didi_tgi/



    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Theo@theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk to comp.arch.embedded on Wed Sep 6 21:56:29 2023
    From Newsgroup: comp.arch.embedded

    pozz <pozzugno@gmail.com> wrote:
    So I'm wondering if there's a standard or quasi-standard way to manage network configuration of devices on the same LAN.

    The situation isn't so uncommon. IPCams are network oriented devices
    that can be controller by a Cloud service from the manufacturer, but
    mainly from a web page. It usually happens that more than one IPCam are installed on the same LAN.

    There are several ways to do this.

    If there's ethernet, it's not too complicated. When the device boots, make a DHCP request and provide your hostname as the device name plus a serial
    number. For example, supposing your product is called 'HomeBox' and the device's serial number (MAC address?) is 12:34:56:78:90:ab. Then make a
    DHCP request and specify your hostname as 'homebox90ab'. Use enough digits
    to minimise the changes of name collisions. A user can either look on the router for the 'homebox' device, or you print instructions telling the user
    to go to http://homebox90ab/ on a label. At that site they can configure
    the network settings if they want a fixed IP or whatever.

    For wifi, it's harder because you need to preconfigure wifi settings before
    the device appears on the network.

    One way is to include Bluetooth functionality, which is included on many
    wifi chipsets. An app is told the wifi config by the user, connects to the Bluetooth and sends the details that way. The device then connects to the
    wifi and may shut down the Bluetooth interface. To reconnect, a factory
    reset via a pinhole reset button will clear the wifi settings and re-enable Bluetooth.

    If you don't have Bluetooth or a mobile app, another option is to power up
    in factory mode offering an access point with a default SSID, say 'homebox90ab', and no password. The user connects to the SSID and goes to a web page as the ethernet example. There they configure their wifi
    credentials and, once saved, the device reboots and tries to connect to that wifi network. If it fails, the user must do the pinhole reset and try
    again.

    For example, Dahua IPCams usually start with the fixed IP address 192.168.1.108. They have a software (Config Tool) that can be used[3] to manage network configuration of multiple IPCams, even if they are
    installed at the same time with the default IP address 192.168.1.108.

    On an enterprise network, maybe expecting any kind of DHCP is too much. In which case the initial setup could be its own DHCP server: you plug in a
    laptop which gets an IP address handed out by the device, and go to http://192.168.1.1/ (or http://homebox90ab/) which is the device. From
    there you configure its IP address and other settings. Next time it reboots
    it uses the new settings. If it is no longer accessible, there's the
    pinhole reset procedure.

    While it's possible for the device to answer at a specific hardcoded IP,
    it's a bit awkward from the user perspective - you have to configure your laptop with a particular static IP, netmask and so on. Many OSes make that annoying, and you can't easily switch to another network without going in
    and deleting all the settings (eg you want to search for help while
    configuring the device).

    On IPv6, a lot of these problems go away if SLAAC is enabled: you know your network prefix, you know what the device's MAC address, so it's trivial to
    work out the device's static IP, or at least one IP that it'll respond to if you try to connect to it.

    Theo
    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From pozz@pozzugno@gmail.com to comp.arch.embedded on Thu Sep 7 09:54:06 2023
    From Newsgroup: comp.arch.embedded

    Il 06/09/2023 22:56, Theo ha scritto:
    pozz <pozzugno@gmail.com> wrote:
    So I'm wondering if there's a standard or quasi-standard way to manage
    network configuration of devices on the same LAN.

    The situation isn't so uncommon. IPCams are network oriented devices
    that can be controller by a Cloud service from the manufacturer, but
    mainly from a web page. It usually happens that more than one IPCam are
    installed on the same LAN.

    There are several ways to do this.

    If there's ethernet, it's not too complicated. When the device boots, make a DHCP request and provide your hostname as the device name plus a serial number. For example, supposing your product is called 'HomeBox' and the device's serial number (MAC address?) is 12:34:56:78:90:ab. Then make a
    DHCP request and specify your hostname as 'homebox90ab'. Use enough digits to minimise the changes of name collisions. A user can either look on the router for the 'homebox' device,

    This isn't an option for typical users without technical knowledge.


    or you print instructions telling the user
    to go to http://homebox90ab/ on a label.

    Interesting. That URL has a simple hostname that must be resolved by the router. Is it guaranteed that the router is able to resolve the host in
    URL in the device with the same hostname? What happens if more than one
    device on the LAN make DHCP requests with the same hostname?


    At that site they can configure
    the network settings if they want a fixed IP or whatever.

    For wifi, it's harder because you need to preconfigure wifi settings before the device appears on the network.

    One way is to include Bluetooth functionality, which is included on many
    wifi chipsets. An app is told the wifi config by the user, connects to the Bluetooth and sends the details that way. The device then connects to the wifi and may shut down the Bluetooth interface. To reconnect, a factory reset via a pinhole reset button will clear the wifi settings and re-enable Bluetooth.

    If you don't have Bluetooth or a mobile app, another option is to power up
    in factory mode offering an access point with a default SSID, say 'homebox90ab', and no password. The user connects to the SSID and goes to a web page as the ethernet example. There they configure their wifi credentials and, once saved, the device reboots and tries to connect to that wifi network. If it fails, the user must do the pinhole reset and try
    again.

    For example, Dahua IPCams usually start with the fixed IP address
    192.168.1.108. They have a software (Config Tool) that can be used[3] to
    manage network configuration of multiple IPCams, even if they are
    installed at the same time with the default IP address 192.168.1.108.

    On an enterprise network, maybe expecting any kind of DHCP is too much. In which case the initial setup could be its own DHCP server: you plug in a laptop which gets an IP address handed out by the device, and go to http://192.168.1.1/ (or http://homebox90ab/) which is the device.

    Are you thinking to have a DHCP server running *on* the embedded device?
    How does the device know if send a DHCP request (to receive an IP
    address from an external DHCP server) or launch a DHCP server?
    Maybe it can try a DHCP request a revert back to internal DHCP server if
    that fails.


    From
    there you configure its IP address and other settings. Next time it reboots it uses the new settings. If it is no longer accessible, there's the
    pinhole reset procedure.

    We can say that in professional environment (enterprise network) it's
    simple to find experts with sufficient knowledge to set network
    configuration of a device.


    While it's possible for the device to answer at a specific hardcoded IP,
    it's a bit awkward from the user perspective - you have to configure your laptop with a particular static IP, netmask and so on. Many OSes make that annoying, and you can't easily switch to another network without going in
    and deleting all the settings (eg you want to search for help while configuring the device).

    It's very strange there isn't any protocol at MAC level that manages IP configuration. MAC addresses are unique in the LAN and they could be discovered or printed on a label.
    With this protocol, you could connect and power up all the devices and
    use a simple software to manage network IP configurations.


    On IPv6, a lot of these problems go away if SLAAC is enabled: you know your network prefix, you know what the device's MAC address, so it's trivial to work out the device's static IP, or at least one IP that it'll respond to if you try to connect to it.

    Theo

    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Don Y@blockedofcourse@foo.invalid to comp.arch.embedded on Thu Sep 7 10:57:50 2023
    From Newsgroup: comp.arch.embedded

    On 9/5/2023 1:37 AM, pozz wrote:
    Is it a proprietary solution that uses only Ethernet frames (MAC addresses) and
    not IP packets? Is it a well known protocol that I don't know?

    RARP gave way to BOOTP which gave way to DHCP for exactly this reason.

    They all run *below* the IP layer so can be implemented (client-side) relatively easily. Assigning IP, hostname, gateway, nameserver,
    timeserver, boot server, boot image, etc. are all done, there.

    (You can operate an ethernet without IP at all!)

    The problem is:
    - having a suitable server present on the network
    (not all will have this -- though most SOHOs will)
    - conveying the parameters that were assigned by
    the service to the *human* user (without requiring
    special knowledge of a special tool which would
    require more knowledge of the user's operating
    environment *or* having a UI on the device)

    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Don Y@blockedofcourse@foo.invalid to comp.arch.embedded on Thu Sep 7 11:03:08 2023
    From Newsgroup: comp.arch.embedded

    On 9/5/2023 3:43 AM, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
    I had the same issue some 15 years ago and I think I posted a similar question here. Back then the "IoT" phrase was not invented, so I am not
    sure if our netmca belongs... :) ( http://tgi-sci.com/tgi/nmca3.htm )

    Anyway, the world has not changed much since, same issue same possible remedies.
    My initial one - which is still active on our devices - was to post
    the IP address on a specific web address under our domain once the
    device boots (it does so via ftp to a dedicated account we have
    for that); the address contains the device serial number which
    makes it specific, the user can locate it using a browser.

    Essentially creating a (remote) UI to serve in place
    of the "limited" UI on the instrument. You rely on the
    user to have something ELSE that can provide the interface
    by leveraging other popular protocols.

    Nobody uses it. They all call before they even try to use that.

    As the device must then be routed, is there a risk of some
    "outside agent" accessing the device?

    So we started shipping a router with each device; the router is set
    to give fixed IP addresses to each of the devices we ship to
    that customer (sometimes they are more than one).

    Can the user alter the "default" name to something friendlier?
    Possibly an alias?

    Presumably, the MAC (or serial number as that is likely friendlier)
    is easily accessible on the device (and, the user is in proximity
    to the device)?

    This has worked fine. Even if they try to stray from the router
    we have shipped they can verify things work with it and dig
    further themselves, look for help locally etc.


    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Theo@theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk to comp.arch.embedded on Thu Sep 7 19:40:45 2023
    From Newsgroup: comp.arch.embedded

    pozz <pozzugno@gmail.com> wrote:
    Il 06/09/2023 22:56, Theo ha scritto:
    pozz <pozzugno@gmail.com> wrote:
    So I'm wondering if there's a standard or quasi-standard way to manage
    network configuration of devices on the same LAN.

    The situation isn't so uncommon. IPCams are network oriented devices
    that can be controller by a Cloud service from the manufacturer, but
    mainly from a web page. It usually happens that more than one IPCam are
    installed on the same LAN.

    There are several ways to do this.

    If there's ethernet, it's not too complicated. When the device boots, make a
    DHCP request and provide your hostname as the device name plus a serial number. For example, supposing your product is called 'HomeBox' and the device's serial number (MAC address?) is 12:34:56:78:90:ab. Then make a DHCP request and specify your hostname as 'homebox90ab'. Use enough digits to minimise the changes of name collisions. A user can either look on the router for the 'homebox' device,

    This isn't an option for typical users without technical knowledge.


    or you print instructions telling the user
    to go to http://homebox90ab/ on a label.

    Interesting. That URL has a simple hostname that must be resolved by the router. Is it guaranteed that the router is able to resolve the host in
    URL in the device with the same hostname?

    It's the way most consumer routers work, there's no guarantees that somebody doesn't have a different setup though. It is possible to use multicast DNS (aka mDNS aka Bonjour) in which case http://homebox90ab.local/ will be resolvable (since any .local address is resolved by sending out multicasts asking who has it, rather than asking a central DHCP server).

    What happens if more than one
    device on the LAN make DHCP requests with the same hostname?

    That's why you include a probably-unique hostname with a serial number. If they still clash, I imagine the DHCP server hands out a different address
    for device #2 and refuses to assign it a hostname already allocated.

    On an enterprise network, maybe expecting any kind of DHCP is too much. In which case the initial setup could be its own DHCP server: you plug in a laptop which gets an IP address handed out by the device, and go to http://192.168.1.1/ (or http://homebox90ab/) which is the device.

    Are you thinking to have a DHCP server running *on* the embedded device?

    Yes.

    How does the device know if send a DHCP request (to receive an IP
    address from an external DHCP server) or launch a DHCP server?
    Maybe it can try a DHCP request a revert back to internal DHCP server if that fails.

    The device out of the box is a DHCP server. Once somebody logs into it and configures it, it reboots to become a DHCP client. To revert back to being
    a DHCP server again somebody has to hold down the factory reset button.
    (or equivalent physical signal, eg smart lightbulbs you have to turn them on and off several times in a predefined sequence of flashes)

    From
    there you configure its IP address and other settings. Next time it reboots
    it uses the new settings. If it is no longer accessible, there's the pinhole reset procedure.

    We can say that in professional environment (enterprise network) it's
    simple to find experts with sufficient knowledge to set network configuration of a device.

    That applies to pretty much any device you want local-only access: somebody
    has to configure it, whether via a web interface or a mobile app. It can't just work by being plugged in, unless it talks to the cloud to pick up its configuration.

    If the admins have decided the devices on their network all need static configuration, they will need to use the device's config interface to set
    that up.

    While it's possible for the device to answer at a specific hardcoded IP, it's a bit awkward from the user perspective - you have to configure your laptop with a particular static IP, netmask and so on. Many OSes make that annoying, and you can't easily switch to another network without going in and deleting all the settings (eg you want to search for help while configuring the device).

    It's very strange there isn't any protocol at MAC level that manages IP configuration. MAC addresses are unique in the LAN and they could be discovered or printed on a label.
    With this protocol, you could connect and power up all the devices and
    use a simple software to manage network IP configurations.

    There is, it's called DHCP. Or IPv6 SLAAC, as below. As Don says, once
    you've done DHCP everything is configured, but you either need to have a UI
    to either the DHCP server or the device if you want to find out what
    happened. If it is specifically DNS you're interested in, there's mDNS,
    which also does service discovery - connect a printer to the network and
    it'll become available to devices like phones without any config; this is because the printer responds to mDNS queries from phones, laptops, etc
    saying what services it offers and the devices configure themselves automatically (the printer also says it accepts certain standard formats
    like raster or PDF so no need for drivers).

    On IPv6, a lot of these problems go away if SLAAC is enabled: you know your network prefix, you know what the device's MAC address, so it's trivial to work out the device's static IP, or at least one IP that it'll respond to if
    you try to connect to it.

    Theo
    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Don Y@blockedofcourse@foo.invalid to comp.arch.embedded on Thu Sep 7 13:19:50 2023
    From Newsgroup: comp.arch.embedded

    On 9/7/2023 11:40 AM, Theo wrote:
    It's very strange there isn't any protocol at MAC level that manages IP
    configuration. MAC addresses are unique in the LAN and they could be
    discovered or printed on a label.
    With this protocol, you could connect and power up all the devices and
    use a simple software to manage network IP configurations.

    There is, it's called DHCP. Or IPv6 SLAAC, as below. As Don says, once you've done DHCP everything is configured, but you either need to have a UI to either the DHCP server or the device if you want to find out what happened.

    For SOHO applications, one can likely gain access to the "clients list"
    in the DHCP server. But, that may not be the case in other scenarios
    (e.g., enterprise).

    It also ASSUMES you have a server running, locally (also common in SOHO).

    I've seen applications that would listen for broadcasts from "their"
    devices (recognized by OUI or content of the message packet) and
    present lists of these devices to the user. The user could then
    contact the device directly (through the application) to query (or
    modify) its configuration.

    But, this (IMO) *raises* the bar for casual users.

    You can also add some other "dedicated" point-to-point port on
    the device that you use to talk to *it* (before it sits on the
    wire). E.g., Cisco APs, APC UPSs, etc. all have such a "console"
    function. But, again, you now expect the user to be more tech savvy.

    A clever way of doing this for "one-off" units is to have a USB
    interface and present to the host as a mass storage device with
    an "autorun" that causes a *portable* app on the device to be invoked
    so the software is part of the device instead of needing to be
    "installed" on a phone, PC, etc. The app then presents a configuration interface for the user writing the configuration data back into
    the device (before being disconnected).

    [Perhaps a JS app could be more portable -- think Macs -- than
    a binary]

    The app could also give you a beachhead through which to install
    updates in the device (if over-the-wire updates become a problem).

    [I use an ethernet based version of this in my current design.
    A "dedicated" port allows for secure configuration of "new" devices
    prior to deployment. It lets me install firmware, secrets,
    configuration information, etc. -- as well as inventory the
    devices encountered, to date]

    If it is specifically DNS you're interested in, there's mDNS,
    which also does service discovery - connect a printer to the network and it'll become available to devices like phones without any config; this is because the printer responds to mDNS queries from phones, laptops, etc
    saying what services it offers and the devices configure themselves automatically (the printer also says it accepts certain standard formats
    like raster or PDF so no need for drivers).


    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Don Y@blockedofcourse@foo.invalid to comp.arch.embedded on Thu Sep 7 13:30:00 2023
    From Newsgroup: comp.arch.embedded

    On 9/7/2023 11:40 AM, Theo wrote:
    How does the device know if send a DHCP request (to receive an IP
    address from an external DHCP server) or launch a DHCP server?
    Maybe it can try a DHCP request a revert back to internal DHCP server if
    that fails.

    The device out of the box is a DHCP server. Once somebody logs into it and configures it, it reboots to become a DHCP client. To revert back to being
    a DHCP server again somebody has to hold down the factory reset button.
    (or equivalent physical signal, eg smart lightbulbs you have to turn them on and off several times in a predefined sequence of flashes)

    How do you address the case of your (GUI) client discovering some other
    DHCP service running on the network?

    If you could modify the *client* code, you could use something like
    a different vendor magic to ensure only the server in the device
    would be recognized.

    You could flip this around; distribute an app that acts as a
    special DHCP server. Have the device only issue requests to
    services offered by *that* server (even if another was
    competing -- see above).

    In addition to servicing DHCP requests, it could query any
    *existing* DHCP service to obtain a lease FOR THE DEVICE
    (acting as a proxy). In that way, it learns the subnet that
    the user's network would LIKE to be used (resolving RFC1918
    ambiguities as well as *assigned* IP ranges)

    This covers the case for no DHCP server present as well as
    a competing DHCP service. And, gives the user a handle
    into the configuration process as a desired side effect.

    But, it's yet another app -- hosted OUTSIDE the device -- that
    has to be maintained :<

    And, you can't lose sight of the fact that the user has to
    arrange for any sort of "persistence" that he may require...
    in light of a network that may not inherently want to offer it!

    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Dimiter_Popoff@dp@tgi-sci.com to comp.arch.embedded on Fri Sep 8 00:14:09 2023
    From Newsgroup: comp.arch.embedded

    On 9/7/2023 23:30, Don Y wrote:
    On 9/7/2023 11:40 AM, Theo wrote:
    How does the device know if send a DHCP request (to receive an IP
    address from an external DHCP server) or launch a DHCP server?
    Maybe it can try a DHCP request a revert back to internal DHCP server if >>> that fails.

    The device out of the box is a DHCP server.  Once somebody logs into
    it and
    configures it, it reboots to become a DHCP client.  To revert back to
    being
    a DHCP server again somebody has to hold down the factory reset button.
    (or equivalent physical signal, eg smart lightbulbs you have to turn
    them on
    and off several times in a predefined sequence of flashes)

    How do you address the case of your (GUI) client discovering some other
    DHCP service running on the network?

    This is another point added to my approach "sell them a router you have
    set up". In fact I had exactly this at some point, a customer for our
    TLD readers decided to stray from the router we had delivered with the
    units they had purchased. The people who had to do the measurements
    (sometimes 1000+ a day) had no access to the corporate router so someone
    there had set some fixed IP addresses for our devices on their
    network, not behind the router we supplied. Things worked - until they
    did not.
    They started to call "your device won't boot at times".
    "Does the LED always indicate the unit did get an IP address?"
    "Yes it does."
    Well does it always boot behind the router we supplied?
    "Hmm let us test... Yes it does"

    [Most likely this was yet another sabotage against our devices at
    this customer (they have no legit second dhcp server there so someone
    must have set one up, the problems started some time after they changed
    routers and well, they have a history of sabotage attempts there, there
    was physical evidence for that).]

    If a design can afford a cheap router just include one and save yourself
    all the headache (that to the OP). Other than that, you are stuck to
    my other solution, which works - just technically, I saw no evidence
    anyone used it ever. People either can do what it takes with their router/network or they use the router we supply.
    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Don Y@blockedofcourse@foo.invalid to comp.arch.embedded on Thu Sep 7 14:31:21 2023
    From Newsgroup: comp.arch.embedded

    On 9/7/2023 2:14 PM, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
    On 9/7/2023 23:30, Don Y wrote:
    How do you address the case of your (GUI) client discovering some other
    DHCP service running on the network?

    This is another point added to my approach "sell them a router you have
    set up". In fact I had exactly this at some point, a customer for our

    That just brings up a different set of problems.
    You have to pick a range of IPs for the router's clients.
    How do you know that your choices won't conflict with other
    hosts in their organization?

    TLD readers decided to stray from the router we had delivered with the
    units they had purchased. The people who had to do the measurements (sometimes 1000+ a day) had no access to the corporate router so someone there had set some fixed IP addresses for our devices on their
    network, not behind the router we supplied. Things worked - until they
    did not.
    They started to call "your device won't boot at times".
    "Does the LED always indicate the unit did get an IP address?"
    "Yes it does."
    Well does it always boot behind the router we supplied?
    "Hmm let us test... Yes it does"

    There is ALWAYS an advantage to be had from having a known,
    working configuration that you can coax the user back to
    trying.

    But, getting from there to something that fits *his* needs
    can be problematic (as above).

    [Most likely this was yet another sabotage against our devices at
    this customer (they have no legit second dhcp server there so someone
    must have set one up, the problems started some time after they changed routers and well, they have a history of sabotage attempts there, there
    was physical evidence for that).]

    If a design can afford a cheap router just include one and save yourself
    all the headache (that to the OP). Other than that, you are stuck to
    my other solution, which works - just technically, I saw no evidence
    anyone used it ever. People either can do what it takes with their router/network or they use the router we supply.

    I think the best approach for bootstrapping headless devices,
    *today* would be to embed BLE (severely range constrained) or,
    preferably, NFC in the device and kludge an interface that can
    rely on something (app) present in all/most cell phones to bridge
    the gap to a "familiar" UI.

    But, this will still only address the one-off sites. Handling
    hundreds or thousands of devices (as is my bootstrap case) will
    always be a challenge -- esp if no techies around to deal with it!

    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Don Y@blockedofcourse@foo.invalid to comp.arch.embedded on Thu Sep 7 14:34:25 2023
    From Newsgroup: comp.arch.embedded

    On 9/7/2023 2:31 PM, Don Y wrote:
    I think the best approach for bootstrapping headless devices,
    *today* would be to embed BLE (severely range constrained) or,
    preferably, NFC in the device and kludge an interface that can
    rely on something (app) present in all/most cell phones to bridge
    the gap to a "familiar" UI.

    Think of how early home computers relied on things like the
    Kansas City standard to provide mass storage in the days
    before affordable disk drives. Find something ubiquitous
    and MISappropriate it!

    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Dimiter_Popoff@dp@tgi-sci.com to comp.arch.embedded on Fri Sep 8 00:53:38 2023
    From Newsgroup: comp.arch.embedded

    On 9/8/2023 0:31, Don Y wrote:
    On 9/7/2023 2:14 PM, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
    On 9/7/2023 23:30, Don Y wrote:
    How do you address the case of your (GUI) client discovering some other
    DHCP service running on the network?

    This is another point added to my approach "sell them a router you have
    set up". In fact I had exactly this at some point, a customer for our

    That just brings up a different set of problems.
    You have to pick a range of IPs for the router's clients.
    How do you know that your choices won't conflict with other
    hosts in their organization?

    In our case, this is easy. The customer gets a sheet of paper titled
    "quick start"; some of them write the IP addresses on stickers etc.
    Mind you, this is a solution to our operation where an MCA is not
    just a cheap gizmo you won't remember what/where it was after two days.


    TLD readers decided to stray from the router we had delivered with the
    units they had purchased. The people who had to do the measurements
    (sometimes 1000+ a day) had no access to the corporate router so someone
    there had set some fixed IP addresses for our devices on their
    network, not behind the router we supplied. Things worked - until they
    did not.
    They started to call "your device won't boot at times".
    "Does the LED always indicate the unit did get an IP address?"
    "Yes it does."
    Well does it always boot behind the router we supplied?
    "Hmm let us test... Yes it does"

    There is ALWAYS an advantage to be had from having a known,
    working configuration that you can coax the user back to
    trying.

    But, getting from there to something that fits *his* needs
    can be problematic (as above).

    In this case it fits their needs perfectly. The router we supplied
    lives behind their router *and* the net behind our router is meant
    solely for what we have supplied. They can access the devices from
    their network, port forwarding does what it takes. Our devices
    can access the internet - if they want them to - so they can get
    live online support etc.


    [Most likely this was yet another sabotage against our devices at
    this customer (they have no legit second dhcp server there so someone
    must have set one up, the problems started some time after they changed
    routers and well, they have a history of sabotage attempts there, there
    was physical evidence for that).]

    If a design can afford a cheap router just include one and save yourself
    all the headache (that to the OP). Other than that, you are stuck to
    my other solution, which works - just technically, I saw no evidence
    anyone used it ever. People either can do what it takes with their
    router/network or they use the router we supply.

    I think the best approach for bootstrapping headless devices,
    *today* would be to embed BLE (severely range constrained) or,
    preferably, NFC in the device and kludge an interface that can
    rely on something (app) present in all/most cell phones to bridge
    the gap to a "familiar" UI.

    So how do I instruct the user where to find the IP address they
    have to enter after they start realVNC? Will the IP stay static
    so they can get just as many clickable options after they have
    entered the IP address the first time?


    But, this will still only address the one-off sites.  Handling
    hundreds or thousands of devices (as is my bootstrap case) will
    always be a challenge -- esp if no techies around to deal with it!


    Your case is completely different, I don't even want to think
    what you would have at your plate if you had to predefine the entire
    network of your user. Me, I just set a few fixed IP addresses
    on the router, some ports get forwarded (they want sometimes to
    access the spectra via http) and that's it.

    Including a display they can read the IP address on would have
    been a good idea which I may apply to our next version, not sure
    why I did not do it some 15 years ago.

    ======================================================
    Dimiter Popoff, TGI http://www.tgi-sci.com ====================================================== http://www.flickr.com/photos/didi_tgi/


    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Don Y@blockedofcourse@foo.invalid to comp.arch.embedded on Thu Sep 7 15:21:16 2023
    From Newsgroup: comp.arch.embedded

    On 9/7/2023 2:53 PM, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
    This is another point added to my approach "sell them a router you have
    set up". In fact I had exactly this at some point, a customer for our

    That just brings up a different set of problems.
    You have to pick a range of IPs for the router's clients.
    How do you know that your choices won't conflict with other
    hosts in their organization?

    In our case, this is easy. The customer gets a sheet of paper titled
    "quick start"; some of them write the IP addresses on stickers etc.
    Mind you, this is a solution to our operation where an MCA is not
    just a cheap gizmo you won't remember what/where it was after two days.

    Yes, but you're just kicking the can into their court. If
    the addresses you picked coincide with addresses they are
    already using, then those hosts are inaccessible "across"
    the router (regardless of which way you are going).

    The advantage of an in-place DHCP server is that they,
    presumably, set up the range of addresses served to be
    compatible with their network design.

    TLD readers decided to stray from the router we had delivered with the
    units they had purchased. The people who had to do the measurements
    (sometimes 1000+ a day) had no access to the corporate router so someone >>> there had set some fixed IP addresses for our devices on their
    network, not behind the router we supplied. Things worked - until they
    did not.
    They started to call "your device won't boot at times".
    "Does the LED always indicate the unit did get an IP address?"
    "Yes it does."
    Well does it always boot behind the router we supplied?
    "Hmm let us test... Yes it does"

    There is ALWAYS an advantage to be had from having a known,
    working configuration that you can coax the user back to
    trying.

    But, getting from there to something that fits *his* needs
    can be problematic (as above).

    In this case it fits their needs perfectly. The router we supplied
    lives behind their router *and* the net behind our router is meant
    solely for what we have supplied. They can access the devices from
    their network, port forwarding does what it takes. Our devices
    can access the internet - if they want them to - so they can get
    live online support etc.

    Again, see above.
    I think the best approach for bootstrapping headless devices,
    *today* would be to embed BLE (severely range constrained) or,
    preferably, NFC in the device and kludge an interface that can
    rely on something (app) present in all/most cell phones to bridge
    the gap to a "familiar" UI.

    So how do I instruct the user where to find the IP address they
    have to enter after they start realVNC? Will the IP stay static
    so they can get just as many clickable options after they have
    entered the IP address the first time?

    You would use it to TELL the device what IP it should use.
    If they tell it something "bad", then that's their problem.

    But, this will still only address the one-off sites.  Handling
    hundreds or thousands of devices (as is my bootstrap case) will
    always be a challenge -- esp if no techies around to deal with it!


    Your case is completely different, I don't even want to think
    what you would have at your plate if you had to predefine the entire
    network of your user. Me, I just set a few fixed IP addresses
    on the router, some ports get forwarded (they want sometimes to
    access the spectra via http) and that's it.

    If it was just IP address assignment, it would be easy -- let
    them all fight for leases and then DDNS so they're all resolvable
    symbolically.

    The problem comes from having to install (device-specific) secrets
    in all of them. If you don't have physical control/oversight of
    the entire network, you can't know if someone hasn't eavesdropped
    on the process.

    Including a display they can read the IP address on would have
    been a good idea which I may apply to our next version, not sure
    why I did not do it some 15 years ago.

    Displays cost money. If you can leverage it for some OTHER
    purpose ("Measurement in Progress"), then it's easier to justify
    the expense.

    If the user must be able to enter information, then the input
    device(s) becomes another issue.

    [I have a NAS that has a display and a means whereby the user can enter
    initial configuration parameters -- e.g., IP/Mask/etc. But, it is
    incredibly brain-damaged: scroll through menu to find item of interest;
    SELECT item; scroll to select subitem of interest; SELECT subitem;
    scroll through available values; SELECT value (advancing to next subitem
    in the process). So, configuring a network interface requires setting
    12 items for an IP address (one for each of 4x3 digits), another 12
    for a mask (ditto), and another 12 for DNS (or GW, I can't recall which).
    The selected (sub)item flashes so that puts a limit on how fast you
    can select subitems/values. An error requires you to cycle through ALL
    of the items/subitems until you loop around back to the item you munged.]

    Engineers are typically penny-wise and pound-foolish in their
    designs of fallback UIs!


    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Dimiter_Popoff@dp@tgi-sci.com to comp.arch.embedded on Fri Sep 8 02:05:26 2023
    From Newsgroup: comp.arch.embedded

    On 9/8/2023 1:21, Don Y wrote:
    On 9/7/2023 2:53 PM, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
    This is another point added to my approach "sell them a router you have >>>> set up". In fact I had exactly this at some point, a customer for our

    That just brings up a different set of problems.
    You have to pick a range of IPs for the router's clients.
    How do you know that your choices won't conflict with other
    hosts in their organization?

    In our case, this is easy. The customer gets a sheet of paper titled
    "quick start"; some of them write the IP addresses on stickers etc.
    Mind you, this is a solution to our operation where an MCA is not
    just a cheap gizmo you won't remember what/where it was after two days.

    Yes, but you're just kicking the can into their court.  If
    the addresses you picked coincide with addresses they are
    already using, then those hosts are inaccessible "across"
    the router (regardless of which way you are going).

    Well they get a router which is meant to be used only with the
    devices we supply; we set it with fixed IP addresses for each
    MAC address they get for their convenience, so far nobody has
    complained. Their laptops/phones whatever they use connect through a
    number of ways - wifi, Ethernet behind the router we give them,
    Ethernet in front of this router with port forwarding would be
    a next option (we don't supply this by default).
    All devices - our netMCA-s and their terminal units - go through
    DHCP, it is just that we have set the router to give some fixed
    addresses to certain MACs. Customers do have access to the router
    so if they know what they are doing they can change what they
    need. Can't think of a more flexible configuration nowadays;
    anything, any additional protocol you insert will only add problems
    without simplifying anything.


    The advantage of an in-place DHCP server is that they,
    presumably, set up the range of addresses served to be
    compatible with their network design.

    So what's wrong with them using their IP addresses as they
    want them and accessing our units through the router we have
    supplied via the IP address it has received via DHCP from
    their network. Many do exactly that, let realVNC remember
    the IP address/port numbers and just click on the one
    they want to talk to. We don't sell them a general purpose router
    so they build a home network, we sell them something to make their
    life easier with our products, perhaps just initially. That's all.
    There are *no* IP address conflicts which can possibly arise in
    this scenario.


    TLD readers decided to stray from the router we had delivered with the >>>> units they had purchased. The people who had to do the measurements
    (sometimes 1000+ a day) had no access to the corporate router so
    someone
    there had set some fixed IP addresses for our devices on their
    network, not behind the router we supplied. Things worked - until they >>>> did not.
    They started to call "your device won't boot at times".
    "Does the LED always indicate the unit did get an IP address?"
    "Yes it does."
    Well does it always boot behind the router we supplied?
    "Hmm let us test... Yes it does"

    There is ALWAYS an advantage to be had from having a known,
    working configuration that you can coax the user back to
    trying.

    But, getting from there to something that fits *his* needs
    can be problematic (as above).

    In this case it fits their needs perfectly. The router we supplied
    lives behind their router *and* the net behind our router is meant
    solely for what we have supplied. They can access the devices from
    their network, port forwarding does what it takes. Our devices
    can access the internet - if they want them to - so they can get
    live online support etc.

    Again, see above.

    ?

    I think the best approach for bootstrapping headless devices,
    *today* would be to embed BLE (severely range constrained) or,
    preferably, NFC in the device and kludge an interface that can
    rely on something (app) present in all/most cell phones to bridge
    the gap to a "familiar" UI.

    So how do I instruct the user where to find the IP address they
    have to enter after they start realVNC? Will the IP stay static
    so they can get just as many clickable options after they have
    entered the IP address the first time?

    You would use it to TELL the device what IP it should use.
    If they tell it something "bad", then that's their problem.

    What's wrong with DHCP telling the device which IP address it has
    to use, the ordinary way? How does bluetooth help here? (other
    than making things messier, perhaps way messier)
    Or do you mean our device has to tell their router which IP
    address to assign us via DHCP (what nonsense... I am sure you
    don't mean that).

    ======================================================
    Dimiter Popoff, TGI http://www.tgi-sci.com ====================================================== http://www.flickr.com/photos/didi_tgi/

    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Don Y@blockedofcourse@foo.invalid to comp.arch.embedded on Thu Sep 7 16:55:59 2023
    From Newsgroup: comp.arch.embedded

    On 9/7/2023 4:05 PM, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
    The advantage of an in-place DHCP server is that they,
    presumably, set up the range of addresses served to be
    compatible with their network design.

    So what's wrong with them using their IP addresses as they
    want them and accessing our units through the router we have
    supplied via the IP address it has received via DHCP from
    their network. Many do exactly that, let realVNC remember
    the IP address/port numbers and just click on the one
    they want to talk to. We don't sell them a general purpose router
    so they build a home network, we sell them something to make their
    life easier with our products, perhaps just initially. That's all.
    There are *no* IP address conflicts which can possibly arise in
    this scenario.

    You can't know which IP addresses they haven't already
    used for their own hosts. The router solution only
    works on the subnet that *it* manages.

    You pick some range of IP addresses. Assume A.B.C.D is
    one of them. The WAN port of your router conects to
    THEIR network and gets an IP address from their DHCP
    server.

    THEY have a host at A.B.C.D. How do the devices on
    the router's subnet access THAT host? How do the
    hosts on their existing network access *your* A.B.C.D?

    The only way you can ensure that the addresses you
    assign are unique if if you assign them under a domain
    that you control (tgi-sci.com).

    I think the best approach for bootstrapping headless devices,
    *today* would be to embed BLE (severely range constrained) or,
    preferably, NFC in the device and kludge an interface that can
    rely on something (app) present in all/most cell phones to bridge
    the gap to a "familiar" UI.

    So how do I instruct the user where to find the IP address they
    have to enter after they start realVNC? Will the IP stay static
    so they can get just as many clickable options after they have
    entered the IP address the first time?

    You would use it to TELL the device what IP it should use.
    If they tell it something "bad", then that's their problem.

    What's wrong with DHCP telling the device which IP address it has
    to use, the ordinary way? How does bluetooth help here? (other
    than making things messier, perhaps way messier)
    Or do you mean our device has to tell their router which IP
    address to assign us via DHCP (what nonsense... I am sure you
    don't mean that).

    No, the problem with existing solutions is that they
    don't give you an easy way to convey that information
    to the *user* (unless you have a display capability
    *in* the device or enough tech-savvy to know how
    to talk to the DHCP server to figure out where the
    device resides in the IP space).

    I'm suggesting using a UI device that is reasonably
    ubiquitous (a cell phone) as that interface. This
    is similar to using PDAs decades ago as UIs for
    headless devices.

    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Dimiter_Popoff@dp@tgi-sci.com to comp.arch.embedded on Fri Sep 8 04:26:56 2023
    From Newsgroup: comp.arch.embedded

    On 9/8/2023 2:55, Don Y wrote:
    On 9/7/2023 4:05 PM, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
    The advantage of an in-place DHCP server is that they,
    presumably, set up the range of addresses served to be
    compatible with their network design.

    So what's wrong with them using their IP addresses as they
    want them and accessing our units through the router we have
    supplied via the IP address it has received via DHCP from
    their network. Many do exactly that, let realVNC remember
    the IP address/port numbers and just click on the one
    they want to talk to. We don't sell them a general purpose router
    so they build a home network, we sell them something to make their
    life easier with our products, perhaps just initially. That's all.
    There are *no* IP address conflicts which can possibly arise in
    this scenario.

    You can't know which IP addresses they haven't already
    used for their own hosts.  The router solution only
    works on the subnet that *it* manages.

    Exactly. Which is the purpose of the entire exercise.
    They get a router and some units, power everything up,
    look at the "quick start" paper, connect to the router
    and type in the IP address(es) to some laptop, often
    wifi connected to the router - we name its wifi usually
    "netMCA".
    You *cannot* simplify that, not in today's world.


    You pick some range of IP addresses.  Assume A.B.C.D is
    one of them.  The WAN port of your router conects to
    THEIR network and gets an IP address from their DHCP
    server.

    THEY have a host at A.B.C.D.  How do the devices on
    the router's subnet access THAT host?  How do the
    hosts on their existing network access *your* A.B.C.D?

    By accessing the IP address the router we have supplied
    gets on their network to ports which have been forwarded
    to the IP sockets behind our router.You are familiar with
    port forwarding?


    The only way you can ensure that the addresses you
    assign are unique if if you assign them under a domain
    that you control (tgi-sci.com).

    Not at all. The IP addresses on the net behind our router
    are fixed and unique. They can connect to that same subnet
    right away; if they want to access from their network they
    will have to set as many port forwarding pairs as there
    are devices on the network behind our router. In any case
    tuning their network to accommodate the one we have supplied
    is a second step. The first step is to install things and
    ensure they work - for which they don't need to even connect
    our router to their network. After that they know it is up
    to them, like once you have tested your new vacuum cleaner
    to work you don't call support if it needs a cable extender etc.


    I think the best approach for bootstrapping headless devices,
    *today* would be to embed BLE (severely range constrained) or,
    preferably, NFC in the device and kludge an interface that can
    rely on something (app) present in all/most cell phones to bridge
    the gap to a "familiar" UI.

    So how do I instruct the user where to find the IP address they
    have to enter after they start realVNC? Will the IP stay static
    so they can get just as many clickable options after they have
    entered the IP address the first time?

    You would use it to TELL the device what IP it should use.
    If they tell it something "bad", then that's their problem.

    What's wrong with DHCP telling the device which IP address it has
    to use, the ordinary way? How does bluetooth help here? (other
    than making things messier, perhaps way messier)
    Or do you mean our device has to tell their router which IP
    address to assign us via DHCP (what nonsense... I am sure you
    don't mean that).

    No, the problem with existing solutions is that they
    don't give you an easy way to convey that information
    to the *user* (unless you have a display capability
    *in* the device or enough tech-savvy to know how
    to talk to the DHCP server to figure out where the
    device resides in the IP space).

    I'm suggesting using a UI device that is reasonably
    ubiquitous (a cell phone) as that interface.  This
    is similar to using PDAs decades ago as UIs for
    headless devices.


    This sounds too generic to me, I don't understand how
    you will make a phone bluetooth simplify the DHCP protocol
    for a device you connect to a network. Then I don't think
    there are many phones with bluetooth and no wifi so what
    is stopping you to look at the router's DHCP list? You
    won't need another bluetooth device to pair with, software
    for the two to talk to each other etc., can't see any
    benefit out of this approach in the cases discussed so far.
    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Don Y@blockedofcourse@foo.invalid to comp.arch.embedded on Thu Sep 7 18:57:27 2023
    From Newsgroup: comp.arch.embedded

    On 9/7/2023 6:26 PM, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
    The only way you can ensure that the addresses you
    assign are unique if if you assign them under a domain
    that you control (tgi-sci.com).

    Not at all. The IP addresses on the net behind our router
    are fixed and unique. They can connect to that same subnet
    right away; if they want to access from their network they
    will have to set as many port forwarding pairs as there
    are devices on the network behind our router. In any case

    Exactly. Did you not recall my comment that you were
    "kicking the can into their court"? The *ideal* way
    to configure something is to have a DHCP server issue
    an IP address that is compatible with THEIR network
    addressing and register a symbolic name via DDNS.

    But, this puts additional constraints on the user.

    tuning their network to accommodate the one we have supplied
    is a second step. The first step is to install things and
    ensure they work - for which they don't need to even connect
    our router to their network. After that they know it is up
    to them, like once you have tested your new vacuum cleaner
    to work you don't call support if it needs a cable extender etc.

    No, the problem with existing solutions is that they
    don't give you an easy way to convey that information
    to the *user* (unless you have a display capability
    *in* the device or enough tech-savvy to know how
    to talk to the DHCP server to figure out where the
    device resides in the IP space).

    I'm suggesting using a UI device that is reasonably
    ubiquitous (a cell phone) as that interface.  This
    is similar to using PDAs decades ago as UIs for
    headless devices.

    This sounds too generic to me, I don't understand how

    You *want* something generic. So, it can be applied to
    many different products/scenarios.

    you will make a phone bluetooth simplify the DHCP protocol
    for a device you connect to a network. Then I don't think
    there are many phones with bluetooth and no wifi so what
    is stopping you to look at the router's DHCP list? You

    You have to access the WiFi router. What's the passphrase?
    Who *controls* access?

    If you're a small company/department, you can possibly
    go your own way -- and avoid the eyes of little hitlers.
    But, if you have to interface to a corporate infrastructure,
    you may find just connecting your *device* to the network
    requires vetting ("How do we know the device isn't
    malevolent?")

    won't need another bluetooth device to pair with, software
    for the two to talk to each other etc., can't see any
    benefit out of this approach in the cases discussed so far.

    You can offer the FTP profile from your device over BT.
    Then, just let the user retrieve a status page from
    your device and.or *send* a configuration page to it.

    The phone is just a display + keyboard/pad. No special
    apps (beyond the BT stack).

    Because BLE is relatively short-range, you don't worry
    about seeing every host in the department, etc.

    Accessing the DHCP server's client list means you have to
    have a DHCP server *and* have to have permission to access
    it. These are things outside of the scope of the device.

    A "portable UI" that can talk directly to the device
    doesn't require any cooperation from anyone to have
    a service in place AND a means of accessing that service
    (likely by an "unprivileged" user).

    [Many larger organizations have IT departments that strictly
    control what they allow on their networks (you've heard the
    phrase BOfH?). I've had to implement clandestine tunnels
    under common protocols to get through the "policies"
    (defined and implemented by folks with their own sense of
    self-importance) that customers have had in place that
    would prevent me from doing what I would have otherwise
    done safely. (escalating to upper management doesn't
    make you any friends among the IT folks and, *if* there is
    ever a problem with your device, you can be SURE they will
    gleefully stand in your way of fixing it!)]

    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From pozz@pozzugno@gmail.com to comp.arch.embedded on Fri Sep 8 09:41:23 2023
    From Newsgroup: comp.arch.embedded

    Il 07/09/2023 19:57, Don Y ha scritto:
    On 9/5/2023 1:37 AM, pozz wrote:
    Is it a proprietary solution that uses only Ethernet frames (MAC
    addresses) and not IP packets? Is it a well known protocol that I
    don't know?

    RARP gave way to BOOTP which gave way to DHCP for exactly this reason.

    They all run *below* the IP layer so can be implemented (client-side) relatively easily.  Assigning IP, hostname, gateway, nameserver,
    timeserver, boot server, boot image, etc. are all done, there.

    Ok, but you can't set a static IP address through DHCP and you are
    forced to have an always on DHCP server on the LAN (maybe you don't want
    to have one for some reason).

    If I wanted to have only static IP addresses on my LAN, I would be
    forced to change the IP configuration on each device, through
    proprietary mechanisms (display, web app, ...). And if you have 50 hosts (IPCams?), it is a waste of time.

    Anyway I think Dahua (and maybe other IPCams manufacturers) doesn't use
    DHCP to auto-configure IPCams connected to its NVRs. IPCam usually
    starts by default with a unique static IP address (192.168.1.108).

    If you have only one IPCam in the LAN, it's very simple for the user as pointing the browser to:

    http://192.168.1.108.

    If you have multiple IPCams, connect them to modern NVRs from the same manufacturer and point the browser to the NVRs IP address. Through the
    web interface of the NVR, the user can see all the IPCams (even if they
    have the same IP address) and change their network configuration (DHCP
    or static IP) one-by-one or all together (assigning a range of IP
    address sequentially).

    Even if you don't have NVR, you can use Dahua Config Tool software. It
    is able to discover and set network configuration of IPCams on the
    LAN[1]. How are they able to do this?

    I suspect this isn't standard because someone said this works only if
    NVR and IPCams are from the same manufacturer. Even Config Tool software
    can discover IPCams only if they are Dahua.

    I think this method is very simple for the user.


    (You can operate an ethernet without IP at all!)

    The problem is:
    - having a suitable server present on the network
      (not all will have this -- though most SOHOs will)
    - conveying the parameters that were assigned by
      the service to the *human* user (without requiring
      special knowledge of a special tool which would
      require more knowledge of the user's operating
      environment *or* having a UI on the device)


    [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIiI1BIHfms
    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Theo@theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk to comp.arch.embedded on Fri Sep 8 10:17:00 2023
    From Newsgroup: comp.arch.embedded

    Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:
    On 9/7/2023 11:40 AM, Theo wrote:
    How does the device know if send a DHCP request (to receive an IP
    address from an external DHCP server) or launch a DHCP server?
    Maybe it can try a DHCP request a revert back to internal DHCP server if >> that fails.

    The device out of the box is a DHCP server. Once somebody logs into it and configures it, it reboots to become a DHCP client. To revert back to being a DHCP server again somebody has to hold down the factory reset button.
    (or equivalent physical signal, eg smart lightbulbs you have to turn them on
    and off several times in a predefined sequence of flashes)

    How do you address the case of your (GUI) client discovering some other
    DHCP service running on the network?

    You plug your widget into your laptop directly, with a cable, or connect to
    its own wifi SSID. The network contains exactly two devices, the widget and your laptop (/desktop/phone/whatever). If you normally use that interface (ethernet or wifi) to connect to your LAN, you have explicitly unplugged so there is no connectivity to the LAN and no chance of things getting
    confused.

    If you run both interfaces together (eg plug into the widget via ethernet, while having wifi running to the LAN) that will work as long as widget and routable LAN IP addresses don't overlap. This is safer with IPv6 since
    there's a much wider range of private addresses to choose from, so you pick
    a private range (from fd00::/8, ie 2^120 addresses) and chances are good
    it's not used by the LAN.

    If you could modify the *client* code, you could use something like
    a different vendor magic to ensure only the server in the device
    would be recognized.

    You could flip this around; distribute an app that acts as a
    special DHCP server. Have the device only issue requests to
    services offered by *that* server (even if another was
    competing -- see above).

    Offering a DHCP server likely requires administrator privileges, which the
    user may not have[*]. It will also mess up the LAN if they ever connect back to it while the DHCP server is running (since now there are two DHCPs on the LAN).

    [*] setting a static IP on the interface also requires admin privs, so
    schemes where the device responds at some fixed address like http://192.168.33.99/ where you need to configure your laptop for 192.168.33.0/24 also require admin privs

    Theo
    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Don Y@blockedofcourse@foo.invalid to comp.arch.embedded on Fri Sep 8 03:20:41 2023
    From Newsgroup: comp.arch.embedded

    On 9/8/2023 2:17 AM, Theo wrote:
    Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:
    On 9/7/2023 11:40 AM, Theo wrote:
    How does the device know if send a DHCP request (to receive an IP
    address from an external DHCP server) or launch a DHCP server?
    Maybe it can try a DHCP request a revert back to internal DHCP server if >>>> that fails.

    The device out of the box is a DHCP server. Once somebody logs into it and >>> configures it, it reboots to become a DHCP client. To revert back to being >>> a DHCP server again somebody has to hold down the factory reset button.
    (or equivalent physical signal, eg smart lightbulbs you have to turn them on
    and off several times in a predefined sequence of flashes)

    How do you address the case of your (GUI) client discovering some other
    DHCP service running on the network?

    You plug your widget into your laptop directly, with a cable, or connect to its own wifi SSID. The network contains exactly two devices, the widget and your laptop (/desktop/phone/whatever). If you normally use that interface

    Ah, OK. This is how I typically set up such devices -- I find it
    annoying that I can't just plug into my existing network (which
    is where it will ultimately reside) and access it with my normal
    suite of tools. E.g., figuring out where in the address space
    I want it to reside, copying its MAC to ethers(4), making an
    entry in the DNS, etc.

    (I rarely use a laptop for anything OTHER than setting up network
    access on devices)

    Given a device that has a separate (e.g., EIA232) "console port",
    I much prefer that means of initialization as I can just tip(1)
    to the device and copy configuration data to and from the rest of
    the network's configuration.

    (ethernet or wifi) to connect to your LAN, you have explicitly unplugged so there is no connectivity to the LAN and no chance of things getting
    confused.

    If you run both interfaces together (eg plug into the widget via ethernet, while having wifi running to the LAN) that will work as long as widget and routable LAN IP addresses don't overlap. This is safer with IPv6 since there's a much wider range of private addresses to choose from, so you pick
    a private range (from fd00::/8, ie 2^120 addresses) and chances are good
    it's not used by the LAN.

    If you could modify the *client* code, you could use something like
    a different vendor magic to ensure only the server in the device
    would be recognized.

    You could flip this around; distribute an app that acts as a
    special DHCP server. Have the device only issue requests to
    services offered by *that* server (even if another was
    competing -- see above).

    Offering a DHCP server likely requires administrator privileges, which the user may not have[*]. It will also mess up the LAN if they ever connect back to it while the DHCP server is running (since now there are two DHCPs on the LAN).

    I have assumed using "bad magic" would keep other clients
    off of THAT server. You could also move it to an "unassigned"
    port as you have control over the device's client(s).

    [*] setting a static IP on the interface also requires admin privs, so schemes where the device responds at some fixed address like http://192.168.33.99/ where you need to configure your laptop for 192.168.33.0/24 also require admin privs

    Yes, it's annoying to have to change anything other than
    the device in question when you're trying to set up the device
    in question. It tells the user that the device is their sole
    focus, regardless of the rest of their existing network.

    [And, means you have to deal with each device individually,
    AT the device]

    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Don Y@blockedofcourse@foo.invalid to comp.arch.embedded on Fri Sep 8 03:50:12 2023
    From Newsgroup: comp.arch.embedded

    On 9/8/2023 12:41 AM, pozz wrote:
    Il 07/09/2023 19:57, Don Y ha scritto:
    On 9/5/2023 1:37 AM, pozz wrote:
    Is it a proprietary solution that uses only Ethernet frames (MAC addresses)
    and not IP packets? Is it a well known protocol that I don't know?

    RARP gave way to BOOTP which gave way to DHCP for exactly this reason.

    They all run *below* the IP layer so can be implemented (client-side)
    relatively easily.  Assigning IP, hostname, gateway, nameserver,
    timeserver, boot server, boot image, etc. are all done, there.

    Ok, but you can't set a static IP address through DHCP and you are forced to have an always on DHCP server on the LAN (maybe you don't want to have one for
    some reason).

    And, then again, maybe you *do*! Regardless, the user has to be
    aware of where the device *can* reside in his IP space. Do *you*
    know which IP's you've already assigned, offhand?

    If I wanted to have only static IP addresses on my LAN, I would be forced to change the IP configuration on each device, through proprietary mechanisms (display, web app, ...). And if you have 50 hosts (IPCams?), it is a waste of
    time.

    You would, instead, let each device negotiate a lease and
    then register their chosen hostnames with a local DNS.
    Thereafter, you'd talk to KitchenCamera or FrontDoorCamera
    and forget all about the IP addresses.

    Anyway I think Dahua (and maybe other IPCams manufacturers) doesn't use DHCP to
    auto-configure IPCams connected to its NVRs. IPCam usually starts by default with a unique static IP address (192.168.1.108).

    Everyone who uses this approach HOPEFULLY has a different default
    address. The device I configured last week used 192.168.2.10.
    (All of the devices on *my* networks are 10/8.)

    So, I have to:
    - reset the device (figure out HOW and how to VERIFY this)
    - set up a laptop for a compatible 192.168.2/24 address
    - connect to the device (TELNET, SSH, HTTP, ?)
    - locate the STATIC IP address settings
    - pick a 10/8 address
    - reconfigure the laptop for a 10/8 address
    - "refresh" the connection to the device (often not
    straightforward)
    - verify device is accessible in 10/8 (cuz I'd be pissed if
    the device reverted to its default address)
    - power down the device
    - power up, again, to ensure the settings held
    - move device to its intended network

    If you have only one IPCam in the LAN, it's very simple for the user as pointing the browser to:

      http://192.168.1.108.

    Unless something is already AT that address. E.g., my local DHCP
    server (for this 'exposed" network) assigns leases in the 192.168.1.100-149 range so .108 can possibly be in use. You thus force me to use a separate *isolated* network just to configure your device (to get it to some other address that is compatible with my usage -- even if 192.168/16)

    If you have multiple IPCams, connect them to modern NVRs from the same manufacturer and point the browser to the NVRs IP address. Through the web interface of the NVR, the user can see all the IPCams (even if they have the same IP address) and change their network configuration (DHCP or static IP) one-by-one or all together (assigning a range of IP address sequentially).

    Then the NVR is not using IP-based addressing. And, you've introduced
    another physical device into the mix.

    Even if you don't have NVR, you can use Dahua Config Tool software. It is able
    to discover and set network configuration of IPCams on the LAN[1]. How are they
    able to do this?

    Make the device broadcast a RARP (or similar) request and have an
    app that listens for those broadcasts "of a certain flavor"
    (so they are recognized as THE devices of interest and not some
    other device that just happens to be using RARP.

    [Eschew broadcast protocols]

    I suspect this isn't standard because someone said this works only if NVR and
    IPCams are from the same manufacturer. Even Config Tool software can discover
    IPCams only if they are Dahua.

    I think this method is very simple for the user.

    If you don't mind the user having to install a tool for that purpose!
    Is there an OSX version? Linux? Slowaris? Which OS version(s) are
    supported? Which hardware platforms?

    [I.e., any time you have to develop a tool, you have to *support* that
    tool]

    Recall that bootstrapping a device (in theory) is a one-time
    activity. So, anything that you "spend" (development resources,
    recurring costs, UX, etc.) is only going to be seen "once".

    [I wonder if SMB shares could work... push a settings file onto
    a share published by the device using a unique name advertised
    by the device. If the file parses correctly, a "Configured"
    file appears in the share else "AwaitingConfiguration" or "DefaultConfiguration" presents. This is a rehash of my USB
    mass storage device suggestion built on ethernet, instead]

    (You can operate an ethernet without IP at all!)

    The problem is:
    - having a suitable server present on the network
       (not all will have this -- though most SOHOs will)
    - conveying the parameters that were assigned by
       the service to the *human* user (without requiring
       special knowledge of a special tool which would
       require more knowledge of the user's operating
       environment *or* having a UI on the device)

    [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIiI1BIHfms


    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From pozz@pozzugno@gmail.com to comp.arch.embedded on Fri Sep 8 13:56:19 2023
    From Newsgroup: comp.arch.embedded

    Il 08/09/2023 12:50, Don Y ha scritto:
    On 9/8/2023 12:41 AM, pozz wrote:
    Il 07/09/2023 19:57, Don Y ha scritto:
    On 9/5/2023 1:37 AM, pozz wrote:
    Is it a proprietary solution that uses only Ethernet frames (MAC
    addresses) and not IP packets? Is it a well known protocol that I
    don't know?

    RARP gave way to BOOTP which gave way to DHCP for exactly this reason.

    They all run *below* the IP layer so can be implemented (client-side)
    relatively easily.  Assigning IP, hostname, gateway, nameserver,
    timeserver, boot server, boot image, etc. are all done, there.

    Ok, but you can't set a static IP address through DHCP and you are
    forced to have an always on DHCP server on the LAN (maybe you don't
    want to have one for some reason).

    And, then again, maybe you *do*!  Regardless, the user has to be
    aware of where the device *can* reside in his IP space.  Do *you*
    know which IP's you've already assigned, offhand?

    If I wanted to have only static IP addresses on my LAN, I would be
    forced to change the IP configuration on each device, through
    proprietary mechanisms (display, web app, ...). And if you have 50
    hosts (IPCams?), it is a waste of time.

    You would, instead, let each device negotiate a lease and
    then register their chosen hostnames with a local DNS.

    I agree with you, but IP standards allow to have a static address on the network adapter and don't force to have a DHCP server running on the
    LAN. In all these cases (just a few or many) you need to set the IP
    address one by one with whatever mechanism the device gives you.

    It would be much more easier to have a standard protocol that would be
    able to discover and configure/change IP network configuration (even
    from/to DHCP) of a device on the LAN. It could use only MAC addresses
    that are usually printed on a label.


    Thereafter, you'd talk to KitchenCamera or FrontDoorCamera
    and forget all about the IP addresses.

    How to set the different names on each camera? You need to know the IP
    address of the camera installed in the kitchen by accessing the DHCP
    server status page, searching for the MAC address of the kitchen camera.


    Anyway I think Dahua (and maybe other IPCams manufacturers) doesn't
    use DHCP to auto-configure IPCams connected to its NVRs. IPCam usually
    starts by default with a unique static IP address (192.168.1.108).

    Everyone who uses this approach HOPEFULLY has a different default
    address.  The device I configured last week used 192.168.2.10.
    (All of the devices on *my* networks are 10/8.)

    So, I have to:
    - reset the device (figure out HOW and how to VERIFY this)
    - set up a laptop for a compatible 192.168.2/24 address
    - connect to the device (TELNET, SSH, HTTP, ?)
    - locate the STATIC IP address settings
    - pick a 10/8 address
    - reconfigure the laptop for a 10/8 address
    - "refresh" the connection to the device (often not
      straightforward)
    - verify device is accessible in 10/8 (cuz I'd be pissed if
      the device reverted to its default address)
    - power down the device
    - power up, again, to ensure the settings held
    - move device to its intended network

    Again I agree with you. Anyway the approach of Dahua is valid in all the
    cases (90%?) where the network is 192.168.1.0/24 and .108 address is not
    used (the probability of a conflict is around 1/253=0.4%).

    In the lucky scenario you run 192.168.1.0/24 and .108 is free, you can
    power up one camera at a time, access http://192.168.1.108 and set the
    final IP address or enable DHCP.

    If you hit the "unlucky" scenario, you need to follow your long list of steps... except you have another standard tool, the new protocol I'm
    talking about.


    If you have only one IPCam in the LAN, it's very simple for the user
    as pointing the browser to:

       http://192.168.1.108.

    Unless something is already AT that address.  E.g., my local DHCP
    server (for this 'exposed" network) assigns leases in the 192.168.1.100-149 range so .108 can possibly be in use.  You thus force me to use a separate *isolated* network just to configure your device (to get it to some other address that is compatible with my usage -- even if 192.168/16)

    We are saying the same thing. I agree with you. That approach works well
    in 90% of cases. For the rest, is a mess and the use of DHCP would have
    been simpler.


    If you have multiple IPCams, connect them to modern NVRs from the same
    manufacturer and point the browser to the NVRs IP address. Through the
    web interface of the NVR, the user can see all the IPCams (even if
    they have the same IP address) and change their network configuration
    (DHCP or static IP) one-by-one or all together (assigning a range of
    IP address sequentially).

    Then the NVR is not using IP-based addressing.  And, you've introduced another physical device into the mix.

    Just to say that NVRs have some internal magic that allows them to
    configure remotely IP addresses of connected IPCams, even if they have
    the same IP address. I'm wondering how this happens and why this
    approach can't be standard.


    Even if you don't have NVR, you can use Dahua Config Tool software. It
    is able to discover and set network configuration of IPCams on the
    LAN[1]. How are they able to do this?

    Make the device broadcast a RARP (or similar) request and have an
    app that listens for those broadcasts "of a certain flavor"
    (so they are recognized as THE devices of interest and not some
    other device that just happens to be using RARP.

    [Eschew broadcast protocols]

    Of course, there could be many ways, what I'm asking here is why we
    don't have such a standard protocol.


    I suspect this isn't standard because someone said this works only if
    NVR and IPCams are from the same manufacturer. Even Config Tool
    software can discover IPCams only if they are Dahua.

    I think this method is very simple for the user.

    If you don't mind the user having to install a tool for that purpose!
    Is there an OSX version?  Linux?  Slowaris?  Which OS version(s) are supported?  Which hardware platforms?

    [I.e., any time you have to develop a tool, you have to *support* that
    tool]

    DHCP is a protocol implemented in many softwares (for Linux, Windows,
    OSX, ...) and tools, but you don't care much about it. Of course,
    because it's a standard protocol, not proprietary, so there exist a
    multidue of implementation.

    This could happen with the protocol used by Dahua Config Tool.


    Recall that bootstrapping a device (in theory) is a one-time
    activity.  So, anything that you "spend" (development resources,
    recurring costs, UX, etc.) is only going to be seen "once".

    [I wonder if SMB shares could work... push a settings file onto
    a share published by the device using a unique name advertised
    by the device.  If the file parses correctly, a "Configured"
    file appears in the share else "AwaitingConfiguration" or "DefaultConfiguration" presents.  This is a rehash of my USB
    mass storage device suggestion built on ethernet, instead]

    (You can operate an ethernet without IP at all!)

    The problem is:
    - having a suitable server present on the network
       (not all will have this -- though most SOHOs will)
    - conveying the parameters that were assigned by
       the service to the *human* user (without requiring
       special knowledge of a special tool which would
       require more knowledge of the user's operating
       environment *or* having a UI on the device)

    [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIiI1BIHfms

    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Don Y@blockedofcourse@foo.invalid to comp.arch.embedded on Fri Sep 8 09:45:15 2023
    From Newsgroup: comp.arch.embedded

    On 9/8/2023 4:56 AM, pozz wrote:
    RARP gave way to BOOTP which gave way to DHCP for exactly this reason. >>>>
    They all run *below* the IP layer so can be implemented (client-side)
    relatively easily.  Assigning IP, hostname, gateway, nameserver,
    timeserver, boot server, boot image, etc. are all done, there.

    Ok, but you can't set a static IP address through DHCP and you are forced to
    have an always on DHCP server on the LAN (maybe you don't want to have one >>> for some reason).

    And, then again, maybe you *do*!  Regardless, the user has to be
    aware of where the device *can* reside in his IP space.  Do *you*
    know which IP's you've already assigned, offhand?

    If I wanted to have only static IP addresses on my LAN, I would be forced to
    change the IP configuration on each device, through proprietary mechanisms >>> (display, web app, ...). And if you have 50 hosts (IPCams?), it is a waste >>> of time.

    You would, instead, let each device negotiate a lease and
    then register their chosen hostnames with a local DNS.

    I agree with you, but IP standards allow to have a static address on the network adapter and don't force to have a DHCP server running on the LAN. In

    Of course! My office network is 100% static routed (~50 hosts).
    But, that means *I* have to assume responsibility for ensuring the
    addresses are unique -- something most SOHOs likely wouldn't want
    to do.

    The DHCP server gives you a way to get *an* IP address into a device
    so you can THEN talk to it -- presumably to set a (different) static
    address (keeping in mind the pool of addresses set aside for the DHCP
    service, the router itself, the broadcast address and any other
    addresses already allocated in that subnet).

    If you run a DNS, you likely have a place to "write these down".
    If not (if you do all addressing numerically), do you have a cheat sheet someplace that you can consult to determine what's available?

    all these cases (just a few or many) you need to set the IP address one by one
    with whatever mechanism the device gives you.

    It would be much more easier to have a standard protocol that would be able to
    discover and configure/change IP network configuration (even from/to DHCP) of a
    device on the LAN. It could use only MAC addresses that are usually printed on
    a label.

    DHCP/BOOTP/RARP do that. You can configure the DHCP service to
    make leases semi-permanent. Or, to bias the server's choice
    of IP address for a particular MAC (effectively creating a static
    address).

    But, now the user is maintaining a DHCP service...

    Thereafter, you'd talk to KitchenCamera or FrontDoorCamera
    and forget all about the IP addresses.

    How to set the different names on each camera? You need to know the IP address
    of the camera installed in the kitchen by accessing the DHCP server status page, searching for the MAC address of the kitchen camera.

    You operate a Dynamic DNS service that allows name bindings to
    be installed "dynamically". Each host's IP (from the DHCP server)
    is registered along with a name suggested by the host (or the DHCP
    service).

    "KitchenCamera" is unlikely to be suggested by a COTS camera.
    But, "PozzCamera123456" (where 123456 are the last three octets
    of the MAC in your OUI). Thereafter, you can recognize this
    (because of the MAC printed on the camera) and add an alias
    for that camera.

    Anyway I think Dahua (and maybe other IPCams manufacturers) doesn't use DHCP
    to auto-configure IPCams connected to its NVRs. IPCam usually starts by >>> default with a unique static IP address (192.168.1.108).

    Everyone who uses this approach HOPEFULLY has a different default
    address.  The device I configured last week used 192.168.2.10.
    (All of the devices on *my* networks are 10/8.)

    So, I have to:
    - reset the device (figure out HOW and how to VERIFY this)
    - set up a laptop for a compatible 192.168.2/24 address
    - connect to the device (TELNET, SSH, HTTP, ?)
    - locate the STATIC IP address settings
    - pick a 10/8 address
    - reconfigure the laptop for a 10/8 address
    - "refresh" the connection to the device (often not
       straightforward)
    - verify device is accessible in 10/8 (cuz I'd be pissed if
       the device reverted to its default address)
    - power down the device
    - power up, again, to ensure the settings held
    - move device to its intended network

    Again I agree with you. Anyway the approach of Dahua is valid in all the cases
    (90%?) where the network is 192.168.1.0/24 and .108 address is not used (the probability of a conflict is around 1/253=0.4%).

    No. You have no idea how the existing address space has been used.
    E.g., this (exposed) network assigns IP's from a block of 50
    addresses starting at 192.168.1.100. So, in addition to .1 being
    set aside for the router, .100 -- .103 are pretty likely to be
    the first four *wired* connections to the router. If I plug
    in some other host, "temporarily", it will claim another address
    (and the DHCP server will likely let it KEEP that address for
    a full 24 hours, even if I put the device back into the closet
    and pull out *another* device -- which will similarly claim
    another address).

    If I enable the radio, then likely each phone would claim an
    address.

    In the lucky scenario you run 192.168.1.0/24 and .108 is free, you can power up
    one camera at a time, access http://192.168.1.108 and set the final IP address
    or enable DHCP.

    Does the client observe the policy of verifying the address is
    currently not in use (which is done by checking to see if
    anything responds to it -- so, anything that is powered down
    can't defend its address). What does the user do if there is
    a conflict?

    Why can't the *device* fix the problem?

    [Else, you go to the ARTIFICIAL 2-device network that Theo
    spoke of.]

    If you hit the "unlucky" scenario, you need to follow your long list of steps... except you have another standard tool, the new protocol I'm talking about.

    If you have only one IPCam in the LAN, it's very simple for the user as >>> pointing the browser to:

       http://192.168.1.108.

    Unless something is already AT that address.  E.g., my local DHCP
    server (for this 'exposed" network) assigns leases in the 192.168.1.100-149 >> range so .108 can possibly be in use.  You thus force me to use a separate >> *isolated* network just to configure your device (to get it to some other
    address that is compatible with my usage -- even if 192.168/16)

    We are saying the same thing. I agree with you. That approach works well in 90%
    of cases. For the rest, is a mess and the use of DHCP would have been simpler.

    Most users likely have a DHCP server on hand. What's missing is
    having a DNS as well -- so the user can "find" the device without
    having to hunt for a specific IP (or MAC in a clients list).

    And, they still need to configure the device (anything beyond
    IP addressing)

    If you have multiple IPCams, connect them to modern NVRs from the same
    manufacturer and point the browser to the NVRs IP address. Through the web >>> interface of the NVR, the user can see all the IPCams (even if they have the
    same IP address) and change their network configuration (DHCP or static IP)
    one-by-one or all together (assigning a range of IP address sequentially). >>
    Then the NVR is not using IP-based addressing.  And, you've introduced
    another physical device into the mix.

    Just to say that NVRs have some internal magic that allows them to configure remotely IP addresses of connected IPCams, even if they have the same IP address. I'm wondering how this happens and why this approach can't be standard.

    You use MAC addresses. But, the user has told the NVR what range of
    addresses *it* can use. In essence, the user is configuring a specialized
    DHCP service that resides *in* the NVR -- and is designed FOR those
    particular cameras.

    Put a printer on that network and the NVR likely will ignore its
    pleas for an IP address.

    Put *two* NVRs on the same subnet and wonder...

    Even if you don't have NVR, you can use Dahua Config Tool software. It is >>> able to discover and set network configuration of IPCams on the LAN[1]. How
    are they able to do this?

    Make the device broadcast a RARP (or similar) request and have an
    app that listens for those broadcasts "of a certain flavor"
    (so they are recognized as THE devices of interest and not some
    other device that just happens to be using RARP.

    [Eschew broadcast protocols]

    Of course, there could be many ways, what I'm asking here is why we don't have
    such a standard protocol.

    Internetworking is a technology driven from technologists down to end users. Protocols evolve. Why was BOOTP created when RARP did (some of) the same thing? Why DHCP when BOOTP did (some of) the same thing?

    Thankfully, appliances, nowadays, make this a lot easier to manage than
    editing all sorts of (ahem) "text databases" in a server!

    I suspect this isn't standard because someone said this works only if NVR >>> and IPCams are from the same manufacturer. Even Config Tool software can >>> discover IPCams only if they are Dahua.

    I think this method is very simple for the user.

    If you don't mind the user having to install a tool for that purpose!
    Is there an OSX version?  Linux?  Slowaris?  Which OS version(s) are
    supported?  Which hardware platforms?

    [I.e., any time you have to develop a tool, you have to *support* that
    tool]

    DHCP is a protocol implemented in many softwares (for Linux, Windows, OSX, ...)
    and tools, but you don't care much about it. Of course, because it's a standard
    protocol, not proprietary, so there exist a multidue of implementation.

    This could happen with the protocol used by Dahua Config Tool.

    But users don't NEED it. I have no idea what the *local* IP address
    of this machine is, NOW. Nor do I care about the printer sitting
    under it. "It just works".

    AND, I don't have to DO anything besides plug things in!

    The NVR supplier realized that they would have a higher bar for
    their consumers *if* they required the consumer to do all of this
    maintenance. So, they implemented their own service *in* their
    appliance -- instead of having to provide instructions for how
    a user could set up and configure a DHCP service, name server,
    etc. to allow their devices (recorder + cameras) to interoperate.

    They've no concern over making life easier for other camera
    makers or NVR makers or IP speaker makers or...

    YOU could write an app (that runs on a phone or a PC or
    a specialized appliance!) that gives these same services to the
    user. At the expense of having to develop and maintain that
    app/appliance.

    Recall that bootstrapping a device (in theory) is a one-time
    activity.  So, anything that you "spend" (development resources,
    recurring costs, UX, etc.) is only going to be seen "once".

    [I wonder if SMB shares could work... push a settings file onto
    a share published by the device using a unique name advertised
    by the device.  If the file parses correctly, a "Configured"
    file appears in the share else "AwaitingConfiguration" or
    "DefaultConfiguration" presents.  This is a rehash of my USB
    mass storage device suggestion built on ethernet, instead]

    (You can operate an ethernet without IP at all!)

    The problem is:
    - having a suitable server present on the network
       (not all will have this -- though most SOHOs will)
    - conveying the parameters that were assigned by
       the service to the *human* user (without requiring
       special knowledge of a special tool which would
       require more knowledge of the user's operating
       environment *or* having a UI on the device)

    [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIiI1BIHfms



    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From George Neuner@gneuner2@comcast.net to comp.arch.embedded on Fri Sep 8 16:50:01 2023
    From Newsgroup: comp.arch.embedded

    On Fri, 8 Sep 2023 09:45:15 -0700, Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid>
    wrote:

    :
    The DHCP server gives you a way to get *an* IP address into a device
    so you can THEN talk to it -- presumably to set a (different) static
    address (keeping in mind the pool of addresses set aside for the DHCP >service, the router itself, the broadcast address and any other
    addresses already allocated in that subnet).

    And any DHCP server worth its name will allow you to reserve a
    particular IP address for a particular MAC address. That gives you a centralized point of administration similar to DNS.

    This will work even if DHCP is not available because the clients will
    continue to use their last assigned address. As long as there were no
    address conflicts when DHCP was operating, there still will be no
    conflicts when it isn't.

    If you run a DNS, you likely have a place to "write these down".
    If not (if you do all addressing numerically), do you have a cheat sheet >someplace that you can consult to determine what's available?
    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114