Re: [homenet] Brian Haberman's Discuss on draft-ietf-homenet-hncp-09: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[Brian Haberman <[e-mail]>]

Hi Steven,
     Your response look good except for...

On 11/20/15 4:07 AM, Steven Barth wrote:
> 
>> * The definition of Leaf in 5.1 is unclear.  It says "Such an interface
>> uses the Internal category with the exception that HNCP traffic MUST NOT
>> be sent on the interface, and all such traffic received on the interface
>> MUST be ignored." The "all such traffic" is ambiguous. Based on the
>> definition of the Guest category, I think "all such traffic" is really
>> "all HNCP traffic".
> 
> I have changed it to
> 
>   Such an interface uses the Internal category with the exception that
>   it MUST NOT operate as a DNCP endpoint.
> 
> to be in line with the changed definitions for the internal and external
> categories (to address one of Ben's comments).
> 

Two things on this.  First, is a Leaf interface on the router facing
devices that don't support HNCP or on the hosts facing an HNCP router? I
would think you would want this to be a category on the router.  Second,
I don't quite understand "DNCP endpoint". There is no definition of that
in either this spec or the DNCP spec. So, I am not sure what that would
entail for an implementer.

Regards,
Brian