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

[Michael Thomas <[e-mail]>]

On 10/15/14, 3:49 PM, Ted Lemon wrote:
> On Oct 15, 2014, at 3:01 PM, Michael Thomas <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> See, I don't find that ideal at all. If I'm swinging around on my backyard trapeze watching
>> the flying wallendas instructional video from my home jukebox, I really don't want to have
>> my network break connectivity because I happened to switch to my neighbor's wifi and I
>> was using a ULA when I could have kept connectivity with a GUA.
> This is simply a non-sequitur.   It has nothing to do with homenet.   It has to do with how the stack works on your home, and what the propagation of radio waves looks like in your back yard.   The assumption that you will be able to access your jukebox over your neighbor's wifi contains packed in it so much new protocol work we could fork several working groups to handle it.
If I use a GUA to my jukebox, the routing will just work regardless of which
AP I'm currently connected to. With ULA's, not so much. That's hardly a 
non-sequitur.

ULA's with mobility are very problematic IMO. I'm a lot more likely to 
wander onto my
neighbor's home network than to suffer a flash renumbering from one of 
my providers.
Mobility considerations aren't a distant future, they're now.

Mike