Re: [fun] status of the homenet effort

On Jul 1, 2011, at 1:45 PM, Robert Raszuk wrote:

> While rereading the proposed charter I have two questions ..
> 
> 1. Is documentation or new tools specification development for home network troubleshooting either manual or automated in or outside of charter ? How about diagnostics in reachability to internal subnets or different hosts on the internet ?

That's a pretty broad question. Let me try and answer. 

There is a prevailing notion that the home network must work well in a "not actively managed" manner. So if we met our goal perfectly, we'd need no troubleshooting or diagnostics tools. The world isn't perfect though, and where tools and such are necessary I'm sure they will spring up. I don't see these specifically as major deliverables for homenet though. 

Note that protocols themselves, in particular auto-configuration and such, are by their nature doing "automatic trouble-shooting" in one form or another, and in terms of "reachability" IPv6 has NUD built right in at least for within the home. So, in as much as this is part and parcel for the protocol to work in an "automatic" and "not actively managed" manner, sure, homenet has that. If you mean defining a "home network management" application? No, I don't think we're going there.  I could imagine a homenet-ops or some such in the future, or as part of v6ops now, that could develop these more though. 

> 2. How about multihoming with seamless switchover ?

This particular elephant has been in and out of various versions of the charter. I'll plead the 5th on this one and ask Jari to describe where we are on this, in particular in relation to mif, shim6, lisp, rrg, v6ops, or any of the other areas that are touching on this. 

Personally, I think it would be naive to not include the various possibilities of multihomed connectivity, at the vary least in describing the architecture for which we will work within. I don't think homenet is the place to solve the general issue of "seamless multihoming" at the protocol level, but perhaps we would point to what works well in a home setting... we might even agree to one way to do it if we are really, really, lucky. 

> I think those will make home networking a bit easier ?
> 
> ---
> 
> Example for 1: What happens if I can ping/trace a destination, browse it's web site just fine, but my cgi script dies ? And I have a real case like this which honestly I am not sure how to troubleshoot. Server side reports no errors at all in the log. MTU is low as it can be.
> 
> /* Well I found the solution but will not say it on this list as I am afraid Jari and Mark will unsubscribe me ;-) */

I doubt that. 

- Mark

> 
> Cheers,
> R.
> _______________________________________________
> fun mailing list
> fun@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/fun