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

[Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[e-mail]>]

For what it's worth ...

On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 7:59 AM, Brian Haberman <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Brian Haberman has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-homenet-hncp-09: Discuss
>
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> introductory paragraph, however.)
>
>
> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
>
>
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-homenet-hncp/
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> DISCUSS:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> * I see where HNCP describes how interfaces are classified as internal or
> external, but how does an interface get classified as leaf, guest, or
> ad-hoc?  Is this some manual configuration step that needs to be
> described somewhere?
>
> * 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".
>
> * The text in section 5.3 seems incomplete. It gives a 4-step algorithm
> for border discovery, but says "if the node does not implement
> auto-detection, only the first step is required." If auto detection is
> not supported and a fixed category is not configured, what happens? Does
> this mean that if auto detection is not supported manual configuration of
> the border is required?
>
> * Section 7 describes how to handle non-HNCP capable routers. However, I
> don't see any operational issues described that could arise from having a
> non-HNCP capable router connecting two clouds of HNCP within the same
> home network. It seems like that could cause problems with a bunch of the
> services provided by HNCP.
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> * Section 3 has several ambiguous/confusing statements:
>
> 1. Does "locally unique" mean unique to the node or unique to the
> link/network?
>
> 2. On a node ID collision, which node re-computes? The one detecting, I
> assume.
>
> 3. "7 doublings" is an odd phrase.  Why not say "Imin * 2^7"?


I don't think I"m reading this the same way Brian is, which does make a
case that it really is odd ...

Spencer


> * I support the other DISCUSS positions raised.
>
>
>