IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> Mon, 07 October 2019 10:07 UTC

Return-Path: <swmike@swm.pp.se>
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 C75811200FB; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 03:07:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.3
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=swm.pp.se
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 e7cbxD-VZP0X; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 03:07:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (ipv6.swm.pp.se [IPv6:2a00:801::f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE6D5120077; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 03:07:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id 0601EB5; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 12:07:26 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=swm.pp.se; s=mail; t=1570442846; bh=90Id4mCsyoLvODQNLTq5nci69ddAu6Vwxtus+ErrYsI=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=z33k/4gDnyJsVuxaS+p9ZW6iEt6NMKd7EFwg2mJGx1GASyilWpCm70Zn+SBn3Z9yI O4nNYsJafAuhYLKsK4krLqAlM41jFirYXGaP1Z9yAftWz349pzKAc3eNZOdU0k8BoQ 9iktHK7qP0KKaVFPQC2OqI+NRK8LxRdvikOqgAaE=
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03E0FB4; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 12:07:26 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2019 12:07:25 +0200
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>
cc: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>, Markus Stenberg <homenet@ietf.org>, 6MAN <6man@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <FF34E138-469F-40F6-BA8F-7AE02F878B29@employees.org>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1910071203140.968@uplift.swm.pp.se>
References: <56255ECF-9002-4440-BA0D-665EFC4BA9C6@fugue.com> <F638F635-9A1C-409E-BDB8-C00DF00A64C8@employees.org> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1910040752050.968@uplift.swm.pp.se> <A52F076F-817D-4807-8CD6-280C2040AEBF@employees.org> <5F0D2E3D-BE20-4421-8A37-E81E6B93B3A5@fugue.com> <E50D25C7-8EF1-4685-9442-021F019F7F62@employees.org> <60B2C15B-E126-4F86-AA9A-9EB9A6C0EB2D@fugue.com> <FBCD2C32-9CBE-4499-A3E9-0FF4991E34DF@employees.org> <A5D12082-3D6A-4540-9AFB-2530D4FA6A32@fugue.com> <FF34E138-469F-40F6-BA8F-7AE02F878B29@employees.org>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07)
Organization: People's Front Against WWW
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/a9HjB332E36WtPHwYF90wUMbVjE>
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 10:07:32 -0000

On Mon, 7 Oct 2019, Ole Troan wrote:

> The deployment challenge of that is that every router must support HNCP 
> and must support SADR.

Yes, there is indeed a problem here with incremental deployment.

That's why I think there might be upside in "homenet lite" which drops the 
arbitrary topology requirement and keeps the "routed home" requirement, 
but also brings with it the service discovery part. Perhaps it's an easier 
chunk of code to deploy if vendors do not need to implement full homenet 
but instead implement RFC7084 plus a few other things?

High level would be to use DHCPv6-PD, turning sub-router WAN firewall off 
and enabling service discovery proxies, as I outlined in previous email.

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email