Re: [homenet] [Anima] Homenet feedback on the ANIMA charter

[Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>]

Mark Townsley <[e-mail]> wrote:
    >> I suggest that ANIMA focus on "professionally-managed" networks first,
    >> with "Homenet" being a secondary consideration, akin to IPv4 is in the
    >> homenet WG.

    > I like that suggestion, with a caveat. The caveat being that I think
    > there is room for a "professionally managed" home network as well -
    > something homenet to date has touched on, but for the most part
    > avoided.

Sure;  we have avoided it because I think most see the only professional
nearby being the ISP, and few of *us* professionals want them mucking around
in our home.  That's the personal experience of IETF contributors as
individuals.

However, we also see in our architecture that we expect two be able to get
service from two ISPs, so in the end, our pessimism about the ability of the
ISP professional to manage our home network is legitimate.  There can't be
only one --- cooperation is required.

There are other professional organizations that would like to help manage our
homes: Apple, Google and Microsoft come to mind.  Yet, even there, we expect
cooperation.   That's why the secure bootstrap problem is more difficult in
the home than it is, in for instance, an oil refinery.

    > It should be up to the user to decide to have their home network
    > professionally managed of course, but as long as that choice is made, a
    > "professionally managed network" WG might be able to provide tooling
    > equally as well for the home as for an enterprise (or SOHO, etc, to
    > Leddy's point). Here is where including what homenet has already done
    > is important for a new WG, if nothing else but to coexist properly
    > between the two solutions. For example, Homenet has had to spend quite
    > a bit of cycles dealing with what we think the home network will look
    > like by the time HNCP arrives (Hierarchical DHCPv6-PD, HIPNET,
    > etc.). Anima should be able to make the same consideration for how to
    > operate with HNCP in the network as well - e.g., new "professionally
    > managed" solution when available, "non-managed" via HNCP otherwise.

    > In terms of scope of work and where it is done, I'm not sure this means
    > the "professionally managed home" work should done in anima or homenet
    > WGs, but I do know we shouldn't do it with blinders on.

What do you mean "with blinders on" here?
Usually that means that the horse has blinders to avoid distraction by things
that aren't in front of them.   So I think that you mean that professional
managed ideas should be visible to Homenet and ANIMA, but do you really mean:
        ANIMA should pay attention to non-managed networks
        HOMENET should pay attention to managed networks

-- 
Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-