Re: [homenet] biggest L2 domain

Gert Doering <> Fri, 13 December 2019 17:26 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6EF21208C8 for <>; Fri, 13 Dec 2019 09:26:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RuD6tHg9gXiT for <>; Fri, 13 Dec 2019 09:26:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F0AF51208B4 for <>; Fri, 13 Dec 2019 09:26:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id F138E41B3C for <>; Fri, 13 Dec 2019 18:26:46 +0100 (CET)
X-SpaceNet-Relay: true
X-SpaceNet-Relay: true
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:608:2:2::251]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E45A6411B6; Fri, 13 Dec 2019 18:26:46 +0100 (CET)
Received: by (Postfix, from userid 1007) id D2E0210A68F; Fri, 13 Dec 2019 18:26:46 +0100 (CET)
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2019 18:26:46 +0100
From: Gert Doering <>
To: Michael Richardson <>
Cc: homenet <>
Message-ID: <20191213172646.GI72330@Space.Net>
References: <20241.1576248848@localhost>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Gz8qS1SaeJIPkG1M"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20241.1576248848@localhost>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.2 (2019-09-21)
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [homenet] biggest L2 domain
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2019 17:26:52 -0000


On Fri, Dec 13, 2019 at 09:54:08AM -0500, Michael Richardson wrote:
> I thought that we wrote somewhere in RFC7368 that the Homenet router should
> collect as many ports as possible together into a single L2 zone.
> I can't find that text right now. Did it go away?
> In testing, we have found a device that does not put it's 5-"LAN" ports into
> a bridge.  That's probably a missing configuration, but in the meantime, we
> have an interesting HNCP and naming setup!

My understanding of "homenet" and "HNCP" devices has always been "every 
single hole in the box is a routed port".  Now that's my understanding and
not necessarily written down somewhere.

Magically grouping ports into a common L2 network and then un-grouping
them in case one of them turns out to have another HNCP device connected
sounds like an interesting challenge, to say the least :-)

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                      Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14        Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                 HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444         USt-IdNr.: DE813185279