IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [homenet] Support for RFC 7084 on shipping devices...

Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com> Mon, 07 October 2019 06:47 UTC

Return-Path: <hayabusagsm@gmail.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 1742612006E; Sun, 6 Oct 2019 23:47:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 tnEa8y2WrhzK; Sun, 6 Oct 2019 23:47:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk1-x72b.google.com (mail-qk1-x72b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72b]) (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 AF31E12002F; Sun, 6 Oct 2019 23:47:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk1-x72b.google.com with SMTP id y144so11574535qkb.7; Sun, 06 Oct 2019 23:47:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:mime-version:subject:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=m1icAvTHZtg/NYXbjFZSe7f1v2TcNA3U+baRdNTYOsU=; b=SbqEHyLSJiATig9/PPN/SMS9TW9SSN5+mA5JMZYKEP/umALiQbObStlf1lzhIT//La 8TN0mL+8JS9S1EJdEbSVP6uximwtbscBhKlCtzzFzae1CSwfM+2T+BxJD09Lio/nbAyz MJs1IMUk0uFbpmn7GOPCa1m01QBIbV8a7Lw/idJKOS0ryvmBPBIwWVM0BGYL6oIWJQDP g6iTZwdRVZLjK4V30qwCE2zZjHUtvwm+xo7UY/gpgBPD2RRI06WwWUheOypF7Pagw3UK OIJHjePVbDgZDV061Szf1p8FG4UHc9Nn7WFhEBGj5qZ1LX0vGnFnr3zo+ngwWB+2MJ4D 9NIQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:mime-version:subject:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=m1icAvTHZtg/NYXbjFZSe7f1v2TcNA3U+baRdNTYOsU=; b=CTkj/wwpgd8DYQT+68j35YYkZNEVLgqIDA3X1A4abpTqkqmnUFYlYZG2+FZFyymDhQ 8je+T70qAIMChLFqCrte6Ga0vhI2mGgQejp0GkZmNbiwNE/BT1vf25ti7zf+b8VTGsSC NOH4c8lewkHYUp5OXHz0uE0QNuaCYce7eO/biFHk9M9mtXhdjVYvCLfBczD+FnJ5USrb QEdJvyusi9IZoTvTHueMC2LMAj7pwQ+PewbM4R0ZY+q+MYZE0elF7gB/lb834o7UDmrS zn/wgIehirjOcEkRLZxi0sMsHrszP+UjILErK3UTrxxj7iKsUkMiW4tsqvTOfR6L8L/H KJkg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUA/UKPmo9SFoIdRPtCGdvy6pt4ELUWD9/SL4xEXhnaNpTJ2Qrk mkk0qwGM5uMOLi9idBh2dVXD0ampmaw=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyq+NjLsilUQskoWCTiqQU603JXnTh5kovdhG1VsOmGt/jb8rIkBG5RSbHISeRA/I+0+9u+SQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a37:4f4c:: with SMTP id d73mr21875170qkb.171.1570430822396; Sun, 06 Oct 2019 23:47:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.213] (pool-72-83-194-140.washdc.fios.verizon.net. [72.83.194.140]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o67sm7147868qkf.8.2019.10.06.23.47.01 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 06 Oct 2019 23:47:01 -0700 (PDT)
From: Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>
X-Google-Original-From: Gyan Mishra <hayabusaGSM@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (16G102)
In-Reply-To: <266266A4-44A6-406F-AC9C-A6F1DEC59135@fugue.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2019 02:47:00 -0400
Cc: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com>, 6MAN <6man@ietf.org>, Markus Stenberg <homenet@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <5981DA62-05AD-491B-8DF3-6282588E3EE7@gmail.com>
References: <266266A4-44A6-406F-AC9C-A6F1DEC59135@fugue.com>
To: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/TgqOGJECmbY9Wmpnbzwj9rQsS4I>
Subject: Re: [homenet] Support for RFC 7084 on shipping devices...
X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Mon, 07 Oct 2019 06:47:05 -0000


Sent from my iPhone

> On Oct 7, 2019, at 12:10 AM, Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> wrote:
> 
> What you’ve proposed doesn’t seem like it would make things better. 7084 give us working ipv6 on the home network. What you’re proposing would take that away. Let’s not go in that direction. 
> 
[Gyan] Understood. I agree that NANOG would be a better forum to discuss deployments of HNCP and use cases and issues that have come up in deployments. But if there is a gap in the standards I agree we can address it here.

>> On Oct 6, 2019, at 23:05, Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com> wrote:
>>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email