Re: [homenet] DNCP/HNCP Revisited
RayH <v6ops@globis.net> Thu, 19 September 2019 15:19 UTC
Return-Path: <v6ops@globis.net>
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 58C1B12000F for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Sep 2019 08:19:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.478
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.478 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_MIME_NO_HTML_TAG=0.377, MIME_HTML_ONLY=0.1, MISSING_MIMEOLE=1.899, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 oaHX4mnnVa9i for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Sep 2019 08:19:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from globis01.globis.net (92-111-140-212.static.v4.ziggozakelijk.nl [92.111.140.212]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3EDC120108 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Sep 2019 08:19:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by globis01.globis.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B772401C3; Thu, 19 Sep 2019 17:19:41 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at globis01.globis.net
Received: from globis01.globis.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.globis.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gYe_xhgU_W5P; Thu, 19 Sep 2019 17:19:38 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [10.124.170.51] (unknown [143.179.120.171]) (Authenticated sender: v6ops@globis.net) by globis01.globis.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 38965401B5; Thu, 19 Sep 2019 17:19:38 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 17:19:35 +0200
Message-ID: <ca63f70f-56b4-438b-99ae-46b09c89596d@email.android.com>
X-Android-Message-ID: <ca63f70f-56b4-438b-99ae-46b09c89596d@email.android.com>
In-Reply-To: <8BC1E900-3E7D-44F0-A01D-94D468627BFF@fugue.com>
From: RayH <v6ops@globis.net>
To: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Cc: Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@irif.fr>, HOMENET <homenet@ietf.org>
Importance: Normal
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/uDUWqHpL9GLSgr-P7U6PiRa6Oc0>
Subject: Re: [homenet] DNCP/HNCP Revisited
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: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 15:19:44 -0000
Yes, of course. We can never change a standards track protocol. That would be wrong. :)
What I’m trying to understand is how bad a problem this is.
> On Sep 19, 2019, at 04:56, Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@irif.fr> wrote:
>
>
>>
>> This still doesn’t address the problem that the HNCP packet needs to be
>> fragmented. Fragmented Multicast doesn’t scale well.
>
> HNCP doesn't fragment multicast, it only uses fragmentation for (link-local)
> unicast. This is way less severe than what you incorrectly claim.
>
> At any rate, the right time to discuss that was 2015, not now. HNCP is
> a standards track protocol, and there's nobody left who's willing and
> competent to work on a new revision.
>
> -- Juliusz_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
homenet@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
- [homenet] DNCP/HNCP Revisited Ray Hunter (v6ops)
- Re: [homenet] DNCP/HNCP Revisited Mark Andrews
- Re: [homenet] DNCP/HNCP Revisited Ray Hunter (v6ops)
- Re: [homenet] DNCP/HNCP Revisited Gert Doering
- Re: [homenet] DNCP/HNCP Revisited Michael Richardson
- Re: [homenet] DNCP/HNCP Revisited Juliusz Chroboczek
- Re: [homenet] DNCP/HNCP Revisited Ted Lemon
- Re: [homenet] DNCP/HNCP Revisited Ted Lemon
- Re: [homenet] DNCP/HNCP Revisited Ted Lemon
- Re: [homenet] DNCP/HNCP Revisited Juliusz Chroboczek
- Re: [homenet] DNCP/HNCP Revisited Juliusz Chroboczek
- Re: [homenet] DNCP/HNCP Revisited Juliusz Chroboczek
- Re: [homenet] DNCP/HNCP Revisited Ted Lemon
- Re: [homenet] DNCP/HNCP Revisited Ray Hunter (v6ops)
- Re: [homenet] DNCP/HNCP Revisited RayH
- Re: [homenet] DNCP/HNCP Revisited Juliusz Chroboczek
- Re: [homenet] DNCP/HNCP Revisited Juliusz Chroboczek
- Re: [homenet] DNCP/HNCP Revisited Juliusz Chroboczek
- Re: [homenet] DNCP/HNCP Revisited Ted Lemon
- Re: [homenet] DNCP/HNCP Revisited RayH
- Re: [homenet] DNCP/HNCP Revisited Juliusz Chroboczek
- Re: [homenet] DNCP/HNCP Revisited Ray Hunter (v6ops)
- Re: [homenet] DNCP/HNCP Revisited Juliusz Chroboczek
- Re: [homenet] DNCP/HNCP Revisited Ray Hunter (v6ops)
- Re: [homenet] DNCP/HNCP Revisited Juliusz Chroboczek