IETF Logo Mail Archive

[homenet] wifi broadcast domain - Mikael Abrahamsson's comments

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Tue, 02 April 2019 18:02 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 7AEC512013F for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Apr 2019 11:02:30 -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 ZYmpQOmrzOTc for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Apr 2019 11:02:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E37E0120179 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Apr 2019 11:02:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (unknown [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2:56b2:3ff:fe0b:d84]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61A2F38263 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Apr 2019 14:01:38 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id 42307102E; Tue, 2 Apr 2019 14:02:25 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FB1D1A4 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Apr 2019 14:02:25 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: homenet <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 14:02:25 -0400
Message-ID: <23217.1554228145@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/DUzVYuarR2A1Af9G0u6FO1HN-uY>
Subject: [homenet] wifi broadcast domain - Mikael Abrahamsson's comments
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 18:02:31 -0000

prplMesh solves the wifi broadcast domain issue.
   https://prplfoundation.org/working-groups/prplmesh/

I don't think we can fight this.  I'm upset that this is a gated
organization, and I hate it more than you.  Perhaps we can ask for a formal
liason, perhaps via Broadband Forum.

My question is how can we use HNCP to help manage this.
I don't know, as I haven't read their specification, but I'd like to figure
it out.   I think it's further layer-2 hacks inspired from 30 years of living
in IPv4.

A reason we need to delve into prplMesh is that it permits us to hairpin
traffic between two wifi devices to go through the (security) gateway so that
they can't attack each other.

I, like Juliusz, think we can do this better in layer-3 with much less complex
machinery, but I'm not sure that Homenet should solve this problem itself.

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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email