IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [homenet] Status of draft-tldm-simple-homenet-naming CFA

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Fri, 11 August 2017 13:03 UTC

Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.com>
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 2DD07131D2C for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Aug 2017 06:03:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 OKStI2f-mNbX for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Aug 2017 06:03:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pg0-x231.google.com (mail-pg0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A2A051252BA for <homenet@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Aug 2017 06:03:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pg0-x231.google.com with SMTP id u185so15419758pgb.1 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Aug 2017 06:03:09 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=QqOqedArx/cebo+FURmkwB+dln+uSpoEKXRbzjht3gE=; b=eYDa0C57tM9FGNPNn0SPB+japvjvzeiCNz9mi5SKbcKMAmepSPlTJRXriooh2dij8U YmsaMzoNW6WssPKMWwzLs2wQDPLmMkIzwV5vM55OUJOcxBzSIwX9OAo9ddo6gvnkKvCC fGkdLGvwJGRVZS1xjjtQxEc4eH8KFeh592PqQpEWRCPI2s8jfCphSkfSc+UYn4DaCWV3 nFFpWYdrSU0OGCHsRRUsROERxWA+X6Un2FZ2CyfBTs2bcnZVaThItqR0tqYw5rouZW+9 IyepeXzRqtpiMu1708qHk9YoPjaQWZt2EbtQfouemM4CIGbSjcgIpJ2/H4RxROsTLZmX svMQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=QqOqedArx/cebo+FURmkwB+dln+uSpoEKXRbzjht3gE=; b=TiAsjCtirbF5zcjBoRK9aYgCVG4wZKNMn3z0FGTgq03L3dB60GWkpLDrHWcWRmijeU 0dLqxbAjNPDoDc1CKCAVDNzrNKWc+PxDi6xEIuXuxD6mCoTZ8dXnqB5MjuS2APzy8GkT rLQiPRm6eHXpRrBMmUEtxftLtW3Gfsop3ChWHnnpw+CxEP0Q2VGoSr263IWTL2jjlmqn qqAJ9kZuWIyJ+esZmozR7rQXMBi20rQQ350of35+qbfx/RR8OymqfxlcfdEtr2fsHoTR ow962fmAoSbdF+DLUy12XjICr+VbBc2cn3RPeZMohiOwCHFqwFd7k6uecHd625GjiqRL Zwhg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHYfb5iYNps7blTIrWT0xzYKFIEOfIw6slP25tUen9z2eESNC8HYyX7j BUnAra9WMXfK1h08tgRwyMHZQFE/BOJ7
X-Received: by 10.98.200.152 with SMTP id i24mr16429348pfk.33.1502456589132; Fri, 11 Aug 2017 06:03:09 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.100.180.131 with HTTP; Fri, 11 Aug 2017 06:03:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.100.180.131 with HTTP; Fri, 11 Aug 2017 06:03:08 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <877eyaz2jm.fsf@toke.dk>
References: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DBF5904@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> <20170810203843.xq7wxdxp27vqt4pz@mx4.yitter.info> <87wp6byvw5.fsf@toke.dk> <A9C8CA05-54A0-4160-B2F0-645744BD259E@fugue.com> <87poc3yt3d.fsf@toke.dk> <22E4B7B8-317F-4CBB-8536-D0AB345B0837@fugue.com> <87h8xez9ys.fsf@toke.dk> <CAPt1N1m+218+FX_G+2W-msDWmxP8XXMKF9S0faTeCBnEEzk1uw@mail.gmail.com> <877eyaz2jm.fsf@toke.dk>
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2017 09:03:08 -0400
Message-ID: <CAPt1N1m5nVGD-y2VrbkoTEPTs4qF98oRxGuvd-Has1yzuS0fmg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@toke.dk>
Cc: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>, HOMENET <homenet@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c1113be493b57055679ef33"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/EIIZJM3InjK4pqp-BVeinSYY6eo>
Subject: Re: [homenet] Status of draft-tldm-simple-homenet-naming CFA
X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Fri, 11 Aug 2017 13:03:12 -0000

Why do you want it to be optional?  What problem are you trying to solve?
Do you not know how to do it?  Do you think it's resource intensive? Do you
think it reduces reliability more than not doing it?

On Aug 11, 2017 8:55 AM, "Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@toke.dk> wrote:

> Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> writes:
>
> > How does the client know in which PvD a response is intended to exist.
>
> Well, in some cases normal source address selection rules are going to
> do the trick (i.e., the client picks the source address closest to the
> destination). In others it won't, and the client will get degraded
> behaviour.
>
> > Also, what problem are you trying to solve here? What you described
> > sounds like it's just an attempt at implementing mpvd on a homenet
> > without requiring that all routers behave the same.
>
> Well, as I said I would be perfectly happy to just ignore the MPvD issue
> entirely. What I'm trying to do is at least make it optional for a
> homenet router to implement it... :)
>
> -Toke
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email