Re: [homenet] Let's make in-home ULA presence a MUST !?

James Woodyatt <jhw@nestlabs.com> Wed, 15 October 2014 20:28 UTC

Return-Path: <jhw@nestlabs.com>
X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4A8C1A8935 for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 13:28:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.984
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.984 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, PLING_QUERY=0.994, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FvDm2HfAqIc4 for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 13:28:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vc0-f170.google.com (mail-vc0-f170.google.com [209.85.220.170]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 88B001ACCE6 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 13:28:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vc0-f170.google.com with SMTP id hy10so1647436vcb.1 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 13:28:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=w/DJGBd5YtMyAEcKLAtHnT0tYL7itB0s0K3eM1PqVAQ=; b=TCtm/AcNLjkkYPyhkmNpXj0PDt33rxAc4RNALQTf8+TX0zNWFQ7GkNqp74477Ry0tQ V0daLiIcPub3GNGe8hF6Vd05hrfrm3PieFSIU0X9Vnkh74ZW274T2Fe4nYRtP5KV5iZg yl3syKPihbAQbyRXgCnOqClaHXTENgh0OmgYqJDMVX31MxW2NgdjhASGD/IZhAQVR2U0 864pFO/d/Zpw148B14beXosHDk2cJFEAnGPJyhQrq0NpLVDqLY0C+vZiqRbIVSi50dPe H4gmwoifmPKcmuTyqDoGmJWMwplLGuVeRNttcpJ6fvaestWgJF4AYzTj6Ewjw0PmSelX PFvA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmunckkiR2wfP1aG63aEYIZKjilHlj6ZOdAdG4x41GTnaCURh2JvBGhw5dLcpJk02Q5NmS5
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.52.30.232 with SMTP id v8mr12576290vdh.24.1413404906553; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 13:28:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.31.10.65 with HTTP; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 13:28:26 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <543ED2A7.3090409@mtcc.com>
References: <CAAedzxp1R-C5E9RJVMVLRJxPc0w4zooPtqnvWK9eggpZu4=xtg@mail.gmail.com> <C7F3DE60-F596-4BAD-9C28-74006966E5B9@fugue.com> <20141014142746.GX31092@Space.Net> <69B1F2CB-88C6-4211-83F3-11C8A3E7BFD2@fugue.com> <20141014145930.GY31092@Space.Net> <m1Xe3jL-0000I7C@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <20141014154111.GZ31092@Space.Net> <C6760B68-C913-4B22-98E6-6D29A66F80D9@fugue.com> <20141015150422.GW31092@Space.Net> <4E2E154E-D231-4E79-860A-56948A13CDD4@fugue.com> <20141015154841.GY31092@Space.Net> <CBC8A3D9-9EBD-47FF-B066-247898FF2000@fugue.com> <543EA248.2080700@mtcc.com> <CB50B30B-DC36-4354-96B7-19AE415BD03F@fugue.com> <543EBE40.3030201@mtcc.com> <BA5ABBFA-9D13-4975-A96C-530FE958322A@fugue.com> <543ED2A7.3090409@mtcc.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 13:28:26 -0700
Message-ID: <CADhXe51DF1KkeURMQikAL0Ryis9+94TgOvf6VmfSpF9A=BvRzg@mail.gmail.com>
From: James Woodyatt <jhw@nestlabs.com>
To: HOMENET Working Group <homenet@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec51d2d9661196c05057bf9e8
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/4I4PDZTFRiap-qmLjBw4o_f1DFc
Subject: Re: [homenet] Let's make in-home ULA presence a MUST !?
X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: <homenet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/homenet/>
List-Post: <mailto:homenet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 20:28:29 -0000

On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com> wrote:

> [...] I really don't want to have my network break connectivity because I
> happened to switch to my neighbor's wifi and I was using a ULA when I could
> have kept connectivity with a GUA.
>

Except REC-49 in RFC 6092 does not recommend transparency as the default
operating mode of residential gateway firewalls. And very few in actual
deployments are transparent by default. So this can't be expected to work
even with GUA instead of ULA.

-- 
james woodyatt <jhw@nestlabs.com>
Nest Labs, Communications Engineering