IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [homenet] [Snac] summary of Gateway 2 Gateway side meeting

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Tue, 09 August 2022 01:54 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 A159DC14F747; Mon, 8 Aug 2022 18:54:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.706
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.706 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=neutral reason="invalid (public key: not available)" header.d=sandelman.ca
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id phmjXcvR2hCX; Mon, 8 Aug 2022 18:54:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4F2B4C14F730; Mon, 8 Aug 2022 18:54:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5C04182AE; Mon, 8 Aug 2022 22:13:13 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 71KKuG-uThs9; Mon, 8 Aug 2022 22:13:12 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 016741828F; Mon, 8 Aug 2022 22:13:12 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=sandelman.ca; s=mail; t=1660011192; bh=ODeDedQClQ/DugBxr412a2LD1GhbEekKJ9PUFAsZ4cE=; h=From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=9AiiHMaPQQllMfK6NBJhPOUC6ijZAF+vcateo5A8bCsINO5HPw9187bNuu6Gx83oK K4ClYr1j5qMy5DKywClma3RniC1KlPKP/eUuYutQN27f8tpFfroVVl9OQv9atazTrw aN619muupetDaf9VldLhY+ldtwR4GOuIaT/ibsuZHiq56e+K2IPNYsV8i3ju6E0U9V ok4dmV/BkuRgvExEGG5NBUt6XzrsLhCo2C/oOs3+l7b1FTlzFGlNhrAiCN1E8zjLW9 2apFD6fgglwMMF25u0VfchHx6X56l+qOjBZLGeK1qzU/L6CS7vp+F2+YoS8BF6hRCS 0miZ1Tzt5XWfg==
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id D313766E; Mon, 8 Aug 2022 21:54:06 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Marc Blanchet <marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca>
cc: homenet@ietf.org, snac@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <824D01E2-25BC-470F-945F-9D64A299F2EE@viagenie.ca>
References: <8183.1659992388@localhost> <824D01E2-25BC-470F-945F-9D64A299F2EE@viagenie.ca>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 27.1
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-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2022 21:54:06 -0400
Message-ID: <906.1660010046@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/QYMONxCSQ6PPM0vllF2HURqdCsc>
Subject: Re: [homenet] [Snac] summary of Gateway 2 Gateway side meeting
X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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, 09 Aug 2022 01:54:15 -0000

Marc Blanchet <marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca> wrote:
    >> Also, because ICN does not involve making active (in the TCP sense)
    >> connections to the sensors, it means that there is no inherent trust
    >> that must be created in the sensors in order for them to communicate:
    >> they simply announce their state and allow the network to do its
    >> thing.

    > I’m getting concerned that we are trying to boil the ocean. We should
    > reduce the scope of this work to what is achievable. The proponents
    > seemed to suggest a more narrow use case.

I think that I should have also reported that nobody in the side meeting
through that it belonged as part of the SNAC work.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email