Re: [homenet] Let's make in-home ULA presence a MUST !?

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Wed, 22 October 2014 21:43 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D5DA1A6F28 for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:43:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.006
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.006 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, PLING_QUERY=0.994, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 x4Rm_-31h5LW for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:43:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pd0-x22b.google.com (mail-pd0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c02::22b]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 146D81A6FED for <homenet@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:42:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pd0-f171.google.com with SMTP id ft15so4301379pdb.16 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:42:30 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=USthBZrSa0I/XrDuMUj9UgZhZltJUziw3eRPmQpLSWs=; b=E4hnHvSoEwId+CtjYVGC6xuUuWMmu/DZ28LM9vMRjFh0UE16L7YWhehLZThzpy6K3J jtVsIe+spcd6scBROk4wZ/1niFzhVjKLoV5L6j6Kk00LdRYZq1eFkbYV8bhivavfmJb0 yxuE7h3ke2RFH++LNrcshNplpSSZ4Lum1HY08ySMoavrBr5HU1PB7brYgOdq8XdNxJ6y jvYFmI//1cPJrxXGojpfFmgg79u2fvfUI7lbuaSVxQ0auSBKnKw5iKgv4LeEyDc83QXT sigzODOs5sD0cuM8tn/+1vgnI6fKvu2RbWO3DMPGgRhWzvsvtNX5Z4wR0hNcLztvOj5J Rj+A==
X-Received: by 10.70.48.36 with SMTP id i4mr871489pdn.20.1414014150761; Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:42:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.178.23] (74.200.69.111.dynamic.snap.net.nz. [111.69.200.74]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id y1sm14951433pbw.89.2014.10.22.14.42.26 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:42:29 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <544824CB.4020306@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2014 10:42:35 +1300
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
References: <72CC13D1-7E7A-4421-B23E-16D8FFAEEB58@darou.fr> <94990F79-439A-4820-B03B-BFEAB01AA515@fugue.com> <CADhXe50DoZjjoG5tfidcGgtXx1TFyYECZyzeWmQstsT3=HPyaA@mail.gmail.com> <0DACB967-C77F-4C8A-82DD-759FF5C39E91@fugue.com> <CADhXe51ya1bHnP8NCvNkuN1+xdhNnA3qnapn7h1XEvmDX2D_jg@mail.gmail.com> <4321EF22-4AD9-4BC8-8253-12034C562C00@fugue.com> <CADhXe51MC4ubB3de+sSm+KSRNQJH7RLVvRUWmQnE393RR+HBnA@mail.gmail.com> <69F7C62F-273B-4808-B7A8-5D2487CAF4BF@fugue.com> <CADhXe52FW+7e8t9Z8fHGvHZfZJWM48gwnDBLhHz8TwZQzMGa4Q@mail.gmail.com> <9C02AF4F-CEFC-426A-B8CC-0A5DA146FB1B@fugue.com> <CBD056DD-D5CA-4B2E-878F-14BB0EF123FD@fugue.com> <CADhXe50Cg 5nsjTBOpjJXxwububOgDo381QRPd3dyW=XfnqO1sw@mail.gmail.com> <1D269223-52B5-4B58-A46F-3B787EAFE4F3@fugue.com> <802A6061-3B41-4296-B739-E740DCF4873F@darou.fr> <648DEA84-6A8F-4075-85B1-AD135719CFC0@iki.fi> <CADhXe53drG2EzQmAvzGstcM-gC0UtjDOY3YQoKswRWYfqky-2g@mail.gmail.com> <32190.1414001095@sandelman.ca>
In-Reply-To: <32190.1414001095@sandelman.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/QZkhk1jMDTQnBI4WgT-TFYOe3oU
Cc: HOMENET Working Group <homenet@ietf.org>, Markus Stenberg <markus.stenberg@iki.fi>, James Woodyatt <jhw@nestlabs.com>
Subject: Re: [homenet] Let's make in-home ULA presence a MUST !?
X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: <homenet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 21:43:11 -0000

Michael,

On 23/10/2014 07:04, Michael Richardson wrote:
> James Woodyatt <jhw@nestlabs.com> wrote:
>     >> My assertion:
>     >>
>     >> Given HNCP generated one spans whole administrative domain, _and_
>     >> should not have routing anywhere outside it, it’s uniqueness does not
>     >> _matter_.
>     >>
> 
>     > Wait. Where did this "and should not be routable anywhere outside"
>     > recommendation come from? And if it's only a recommendation and not a
>     > requirement, then it still matters, right? I don't see that we can
>     > meaningfully make it a requirement, and I would advise against
>     > attempting to make it a recommendation. I don't believe such a
>     > recommendation will be followed.
> 
> I won't mince words, "recommendation"/"requirement"/"potato"/etc..  I think
> it's a very strong SHOULD, the only reason for someone to do otherwise would
> by explicit geek-administator action.  Manually configuring a VPN for example.
> 
> It's not saying that ULA can never be routed by consenting adults, it's
> saying that the Homenet ULA SHOULD never be routed outside that homenet.
> 
> Where it comes from; from the architecture document, I hope.
> I'm pretty sure we said that somewhere, but I'll have to go search for the
> specific statement.

You may be thinking of http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4193#section-4,
if we equate "site" to "homenet". I just re-read it and it all still
seems right to me. It doesn't discuss network splits, however, and
that is not a theoretical issue in homenets.

   Brian

> 
> I'm comfortable with a Homenet ULA existing in two places when equipment gets
> seperated for a period of non-trivial time.   For instance, I fully
> anticipate having 1-2 routers in my VM camper van, and I fully expect them to
> travel.  {I might even bring up an explicit VPN to link stuff back together.}
> I imagine that most people will expect their various conveyances, including
> their (smart) backpacks to do this kind of thing.
> Or taking stuff to the cottage for the summer, and bringing it back later on.
> If we split up the 64K available /64s sensibly, it shouldn't be a big deal.
> 
> I think that it's entirely reasonable that giving up the ULA when you move
> equipment requires an explicit administrator action, like holding down the
> FACTORY RESET button.  Sure, people might not do that; sure there might be
> some people confusion when 5 friends get together for a "LAN" party ("hey,
> why are there three servers called 'quake'? Which one is "quake-1"?"), but I
> don't think that will be any systems confused by such activity.
> 
> --
> Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>ca>, Sandelman Software Works
>  -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> homenet mailing list
> homenet@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet