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

Erik Kline <ek@google.com> Mon, 04 July 2011 05:13 UTC

Return-Path: <ek@google.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 302EE21F861C for <fun@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 3 Jul 2011 22:13:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, 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 uQoN6CXei2ir for <fun@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 3 Jul 2011 22:13:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp-out.google.com (smtp-out.google.com [74.125.121.67]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A9B221F855F for <fun@ietf.org>; Sun, 3 Jul 2011 22:13:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hpaq14.eem.corp.google.com (hpaq14.eem.corp.google.com [172.25.149.14]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id p645DN0k020339 for <fun@ietf.org>; Sun, 3 Jul 2011 22:13:24 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; t=1309756404; bh=tVi6bkWcFpsfPLYdSlDxfZrEbtg=; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID:Subject:From: To:Cc:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=ozFKE4EJJcOBGKA0Wz/K42A1ciG7smn0EK3zxkbdNnGfYR1r3lSb66eny2MNxQNET rCAHn94F5zNeKYB+jcizg==
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=dkim-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date: message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:x-system-of-record; b=owz+t8lUSwWK/AS8dtY4resz3ZB7EXMYYR9JbxIe8h8r3r2Zvv9sTRwR7ogT1n7dF brAK9mVSMGTTUe+rjHVxw==
Received: from pzk27 (pzk27.prod.google.com [10.243.19.155]) by hpaq14.eem.corp.google.com with ESMTP id p645DLbO009955 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for <fun@ietf.org>; Sun, 3 Jul 2011 22:13:22 -0700
Received: by pzk27 with SMTP id 27so3118000pzk.27 for <fun@ietf.org>; Sun, 03 Jul 2011 22:13:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=PKH3St7XblsmakY49siZSGU5CH0WhmJt2iJ5Rnae4EI=; b=aMBLk/7ZYbriRf/kvLnBFF+vh99SOTCnnS3vdBSlXAA6Eu6CZVjJMjcD7atkqZAGt4 +E0pDAtyDAUrHj3Xywgg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.142.242.6 with SMTP id p6mr2683963wfh.96.1309756400933; Sun, 03 Jul 2011 22:13:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.142.179.17 with HTTP; Sun, 3 Jul 2011 22:13:20 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <A244E343-80FE-424B-9F18-EA0A437721E9@apple.com>
References: <20110701204301.069D218C14E@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <A244E343-80FE-424B-9F18-EA0A437721E9@apple.com>
Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2011 14:13:20 +0900
Message-ID: <CAAedzxqf+YeVHJeAfOWs44RvxAq5H4TA2qunUNWSaMfM9e-51w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Erik Kline <ek@google.com>
To: james woodyatt <jhw@apple.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-System-Of-Record: true
Cc: fun@ietf.org
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: Mon, 04 Jul 2011 05:13:26 -0000

> 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.

+1

This plus the idea of being able to map a public v6 address to an
internal IPv4 address (the home gateway does the address family
translation) and folks could have all manner of broader access that
just what portmapping allows.

If the mechanism could resync and adjust accordingly when the public
IPv4 address changes (probably involving dyndns.org-like updates),
then why not have multiple named webservers running at home (all on
v6, port 80)?

Things get more complicated if there's a CGN in the picture, but that
could be addressed by separate efforts.