IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [fun] [homegate] HOMENET working group proposal

james woodyatt <jhw@apple.com> Fri, 01 July 2011 23:17 UTC

Return-Path: <jhw@apple.com>
X-Original-To: fun@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: fun@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5EE511E81CB for <fun@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Jul 2011 16:17:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 94L147OBJmS3 for <fun@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Jul 2011 16:17:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-out.apple.com (crispin.apple.com [17.151.62.50]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3380D11E811F for <fun@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Jul 2011 16:17:28 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET="US-ASCII"
Received: from relay12.apple.com ([17.128.113.53]) by mail-out.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Exchange Server 7u4-20.01 64bit (built Nov 21 2010)) with ESMTPS id <0LNO009OCGOKH061@mail-out.apple.com> for fun@ietf.org; Fri, 01 Jul 2011 16:17:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: 11807135-b7b76ae000001169-da-4e0e55f2790e
Received: from koseret (koseret.apple.com [17.151.62.39]) (using TLS with cipher RC4-MD5 (RC4-MD5/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by relay12.apple.com (Apple SCV relay) with SMTP id 93.B4.04457.3F55E0E4; Fri, 01 Jul 2011 16:19:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [17.193.13.64] (unknown [17.193.13.64]) by koseret.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Exchange Server 7u4-20.01 64bit (built Nov 21 2010)) with ESMTPSA id <0LNO00FNVGOVQB90@koseret.apple.com> for fun@ietf.org; Fri, 01 Jul 2011 16:17:19 -0700 (PDT)
From: james woodyatt <jhw@apple.com>
In-reply-to: <20110701204301.069D218C14E@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2011 16:17:18 -0700
Message-id: <A244E343-80FE-424B-9F18-EA0A437721E9@apple.com>
References: <20110701204301.069D218C14E@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
To: fun@ietf.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1244.3)
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFprOLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUiON1OXfdzKJ+fwf/LHBaPD8xid2D0WLLk J1MAYxSXTUpqTmZZapG+XQJXRs/liIKt7BXPPzxlaWD8ydrFyMkhIWAicbjpDAuELSZx4d56 ti5GLg4hgU4miYtPr7ODJHgFBCV+TL4HVMTBwSwgL3HwvCxImFlAS+L7o1YWiPppTBIvb/0B GyQsYCPRuHsiG4jNJqAi8e3yXSYQm1PAVuL1123MIHNYBFQlelboQoy3kVg2fy0jiC0EZN86 +gusVURAQGLntDvsELfJSyxu+cw4gZF/FpKLZiFcNAvJRQsYmVcxChal5iRWGhrpJRYU5KTq JefnbmIEBVdDoekOxkcL1Q8xCnAwKvHwLnzK6yfEmlhWXJl7iFGCg1lJhPc/C5+fEG9KYmVV alF+fFFpTmrxIUZpDhYlcd4qRy4/IYH0xJLU7NTUgtQimCwTB6dUA6PAtzpv/k0CUtsUdaJC H85WFPHjbNDuuPlxVYvHpm/2t1ds3/j1uc+fVzUXMkNnTtdJ1royobBPXJh3Vpfr82O3hCoy EsSPcqUrptiuS/k96adr1LzwaNbYl/c/PnXVPsRb7XErXFBi6ZxZ97L++WjefvMpfY6uJUt3 Heui25ekHgg9ar46o0mJpTgj0VCLuag4EQBUUkTRKgIAAA==
Subject: Re: [fun] [homegate] HOMENET working group proposal
X-BeenThere: fun@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "FUture home Networking \(FUN\)" <fun.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/fun>, <mailto:fun-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/fun>
List-Post: <mailto:fun@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:fun-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/fun>, <mailto:fun-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2011 23:17:33 -0000

[distribution narrowed to FUN list]

On Jul 1, 2011, at 13:43 , Noel Chiappa wrote:
> 
> <Innocent face=on>
> You mean, like with 6to4?
> <Innocent face=off>

Actually, I suspect that operator hostility to 6to4 is high enough that devising some stealthier means of making their dumb IPv4-only networks serve our higher purposes will be necessary.  I joke that we should use a stylized audio feedback that reminds the listener of an old acoustic modem when signaling the establishment of such a tunnel, because that's a pretty good metaphor for what we'd be doing.

I suspect it wouldn't take much to adapt 6RD to these ends.  Remember, 6RD tunnels do *not* need to be terminated by the provider network.  They can be terminated by a third-party with minimal human interface burden.  Perhaps I should find the time to write a draft on the topic.


--
james woodyatt <jhw@apple.com>
member of technical staff, core os networking

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email