IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [fun] status of the homenet effort

Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com> Sun, 03 July 2011 23:22 UTC

Return-Path: <joelja@bogus.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 4842121F85F8 for <fun@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 3 Jul 2011 16:22:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.499
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.100, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 spiFlO86lv4q for <fun@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 3 Jul 2011 16:22:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 534CC21F85EA for <fun@ietf.org>; Sun, 3 Jul 2011 16:22:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.11.127] (c-76-115-172-69.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [76.115.172.69]) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p63NMRbE045158 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Sun, 3 Jul 2011 23:22:28 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
In-Reply-To: <4E0E46DC.90604@raszuk.net>
Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2011 16:22:22 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <6938EFAB-DCEA-44DF-B743-05894CA09902@bogus.com>
References: <CA31F3ED.4AB6%jason.weil@twcable.com> <4E0DB36D.60303@raszuk.net> <7EC07A1A-CCD2-4A4A-A92D-8475430F558E@townsley.net> <4E0E409C.3050106@piuha.net> <4E0E46DC.90604@raszuk.net>
To: robert@raszuk.net
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (nagasaki.bogus.com [147.28.0.81]); Sun, 03 Jul 2011 23:22:29 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: fun@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [fun] status of the homenet effort
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: Sun, 03 Jul 2011 23:22:31 -0000

On Jul 1, 2011, at 3:14 PM, Robert Raszuk wrote:

> Hi Jari,
> 
>> As Mark noted, some aspects of diagnostics and troubleshooting are
>> inherent in the notion of automatic configuration. Prefix delegation,
>> routing, etc. has to figure out if there is connectivity and what to do
>> if there isn't. But its mostly automatic, not built for human network
>> managers to play with.
> 
> Well honestly while I agree that automation is great for vast majority of home networks, unfortunately for someone like me it is just scary - maybe too scary. If I buy or rent a car I always pick manual ... (maybe wrong comparison maybe not ... but it is just a matter of awareness of one's skills of control).

If it doesn't work without intervention by the user, then the solution adopted by the vendor will  definitely not be compliant with the specification. The condition of not requiring intervention is essentially cooked in the the commercial acceptance of products in the space.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email