Re: [fun] status of the homenet effort

Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> Fri, 01 July 2011 22:15 UTC

Return-Path: <robert@raszuk.net>
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 3ACE811E809B for <fun@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Jul 2011 15:15:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 35OUKTslTmKY for <fun@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Jul 2011 15:15:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sj-iport-3.cisco.com (sj-iport-3.cisco.com [171.71.176.72]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B830D11E8085 for <fun@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Jul 2011 15:15:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av0EANVGDk6rRDoH/2dsb2JhbABSqAF3iHmjZJ1bhjIEkjKEdos9
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.65,460,1304294400"; d="scan'208";a="351718602"
Received: from mtv-core-2.cisco.com ([171.68.58.7]) by sj-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 01 Jul 2011 22:14:50 +0000
Received: from [192.168.1.66] (sjc-raszuk-87113.cisco.com [10.20.147.254]) by mtv-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p61MEmqm009556; Fri, 1 Jul 2011 22:14:49 GMT
Message-ID: <4E0E46DC.90604@raszuk.net>
Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2011 00:14:52 +0200
From: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110616 Thunderbird/3.1.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
References: <CA31F3ED.4AB6%jason.weil@twcable.com> <4E0DB36D.60303@raszuk.net> <7EC07A1A-CCD2-4A4A-A92D-8475430F558E@townsley.net> <4E0E409C.3050106@piuha.net>
In-Reply-To: <4E0E409C.3050106@piuha.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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
Reply-To: robert@raszuk.net
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 22:15:10 -0000

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).

> I think multihoming solutions should be out of scope.

Maybe I was not sufficiently precise. I am not asking to roll-out new 
models of PIC or active/active load balancing for home networks.

I am just trying to see a room for a spec which would define what should 
be the CPE behaviour when someone connects two DSL/Cable/Mixed lines to 
it. I hope we would not prohibit it ... and if not the behaviour needs 
to be either defined here or referenced as Mark mentioned earlier to 
other documents which solve this already.

Many thx,
R.