Re: [homenet] [Anima] Homenet feedback on the ANIMA charter

[Mark Townsley <[e-mail]>]

> On Oct 7, 2014, at 2:44 PM, Michael Richardson <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> I suggest that ANIMA focus on "professionally-managed" networks first, with
> "Homenet" being a secondary consideration, akin to IPv4 is in the homenet WG.

I like that suggestion, with a caveat. The caveat being that I think there is room for a "professionally managed" home network as well - something homenet to date has touched on,  but for the most part avoided. 

It should be up to the user to decide to have their home network professionally managed of course, but as long as that choice is made, a "professionally managed network" WG might be able to provide tooling equally as well for the home as for an enterprise (or SOHO, etc, to Leddy's point). Here is where including what homenet has already done is important for a new WG, if nothing else but to coexist properly between the two solutions. For example, Homenet has had to spend quite a bit of cycles dealing with what we think the home network will look like by the time HNCP arrives (Hierarchical DHCPv6-PD,  HIPNET, etc.). Anima should be able to make the same consideration for how to operate with HNCP in the network as well - e.g., new "professionally managed" solution when available, "non-managed" via HNCP otherwise.

In terms of scope of work and where it is done, I'm not sure this means the "professionally managed home" work should done in anima or homenet WGs, but I do know we shouldn't do it with blinders on.

- Mark