Re: [homenet] (no subject)

The DNS server in the cloud doesn't have to answer queries.   Indeed, it
probably shouldn't.   It's really just a backing store.   The
public/private primary with selective publication is just a functional
block—you can put it where it makes the most sense.   Juliusz is saying
that he wants a nearly stateless homenet; for him, putting the
public/primary functional block in the cloud makes sense because it keeps
his homenet stateless.   I would not want that configuration because it
exposes the internals of my network to the cloud provider (unless it's also
encrypted, but then you have a keying problem).

On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 9:02 PM, Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com> wrote:

> On 07/23/2018 05:45 PM, STARK, BARBARA H wrote:
>
>> You're concerned with the homenet losing state when the master is
>>>> unplugged.   By having the master in the cloud, this problem is eliminated.
>>>>
>>> I can't speak for Juliusz, but my first question was "what if i don't
>>> want it in the cloud"? For one thing, what if it's a cloudless day?
>>>
>> I was starting to accept the idea that selecting a subset of my devices
>> to exist in global DNS. But absolutely, positively, not all. Any design I
>> could buy into will *not* push all my DNS into the cloud.
>>
>
> As usual i'm probably behind, but I kind of thought this was more about
> provisioning/configs. The way I've thought
> about this is that where I decide is the ultimate repository for truth for
> my configs is really a deeply personal
> decision. The easy case is when i delegate it to "the cloud" since it then
> becomes somebody else's $DAYJOB to
> figure out how to back it up, etc. But if I want to keep things local --
> for whatever reason, including tin foil hats --
> i'd really like my homenet to have the property that i can take one router
> and throw it in the trash, and plug in
> another, and with minimal fuss it takes over for the old one.
>
> For naming, that implies that i want to distribute the naming database
> such that there isn't a single point of failure.
> While this isn't exactly new territory, it is in the context of my home
> networking. Better would be to use already
> standardized mechanisms so that everybody's sanity is preserved, if only a
> little bit.
>
> Mike
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> homenet mailing list
> homenet@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
>