[homenet] multiple routers vs IoT

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Tue, 02 April 2019 16:06 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C99C9120073 for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Apr 2019 09:06:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 pi0Q5tx3XAFm for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Apr 2019 09:06:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CE8A3120179 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Apr 2019 09:04:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (unknown [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2:56b2:3ff:fe0b:d84]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50B5938263 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Apr 2019 12:03:44 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id 14438102E; Tue, 2 Apr 2019 12:04:31 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11D7A1A4 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Apr 2019 12:04:31 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: homenet@ietf.org
X-Attribution: mcr
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 24.5.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2019 12:04:31 -0400
Message-ID: <27901.1554221071@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/51Ra2zxwrUTsJJAG_81g4WOo13M>
Subject: [homenet] multiple routers vs IoT
X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list <homenet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Tue, 02 Apr 2019 16:06:04 -0000

The way for multiple routers in the house is to recognize that the IoT
gateway *is* the second router.  It's not a second uplink.

So there are in fact three situations:

1) multiple uplinks. (rare at this point, we all agree, partly I think
                     because it's hard to do)
2) multiple routers. (rather common, often by mistake)
3) IoT routers (usually on purpose)

Let's recharter to address (2) and (3).

As for Ted's comments about backbone router in 6lo... that's rather esoteric
Industrial IoT stuff.  It's not, I think, quite right for the home. At least,
not yet.

{ps: I have the thread that the chairs started partly unread, because I
had contributed to the questions, and I wanted to let others chime before I
argued with them}

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-