Re: [homenet] New version draft-mglt-homenet-naming-architecture-dhc-options-02.txt

Michael Thomas <> Tue, 15 July 2014 19:55 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3DDB1A004E for <>; Tue, 15 Jul 2014 12:55:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.753
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.753 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_ALL=0.8, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id g6nWYFTMow_f for <>; Tue, 15 Jul 2014 12:55:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 161B01A0027 for <>; Tue, 15 Jul 2014 12:55:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ( []) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id s6FJt809028509 for <>; Tue, 15 Jul 2014 12:55:08 -0700
Message-ID: <>
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 12:55:05 -0700
From: Michael Thomas <>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <53C58350.3020006@mt> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [homenet] New version draft-mglt-homenet-naming-architecture-dhc-options-02.txt
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 19:55:13 -0000

On 7/15/14, 12:43 PM, Ted Lemon wrote:
> On Jul 15, 2014, at 3:38 PM, Michael Thomas <>; wrote:
>> That pretty much means that you need a solution that isn't bolted to DHCP, right?
>> Or at least, that DHCP is only providing a default discovery mechanism which my CPE
>> is completely free to ignore. Beyond the discovery, it ought to work identically regardless
>> of whether it's my first hop ISP(s), or 20 hops away in Nairobi, right?
> The point is that what the ISP is offering may be ideal for some users, and not others.   And some ISPs may offer it, while others don't.   So if there's a standard mechanism in place for using it when it's offered, if desired, then that's a win, even if not everyone wins.
> What happens with queries isn't important as long as they are satisfied; there are lots of ways of satisfying queries for AAAA records, but only two ways of satisfying queries for PTR records, and the ISP may support one or both of those two ways, or neither.   The point of the DNS-PD document is to provide a way for the ISP and CPE to communicate about which mechanisms are supported and desired.

What I'm trying to say is that DHCP as a way of advertising a service 
that will host my zone, or
in some way make my homenet names globally available is OK, but it 
should just be about
DISCOVERY and nothing else. All of the rest of the mechanisms between my 
CPE and some service
that causes my names to be globally available ought to use standard 
mechanisms which are not
in any way tied to topology.

It's OK if discovery for non-ISP's remains an unsolved problem, let's 
just have one mechanism once
I know who I want to speak to.