Re: [homenet] New version draft-mglt-homenet-naming-architecture-dhc-options-02.txt

[Mikael Abrahamsson <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, 2 Jul 2014, Douglas Otis wrote:

> In essence, especially because ULA address use was ignored by the mDNS 
> proxy scheme, anything reported by mDNS that is routable is to be 
> published into DNS as a means to establish a routable unicast 
> alternative to that of mDNS.  One major downside is this will end up 
> including devices never intended to have direct access from the 
> Internet, where things like an All-in-One printer or baby monitor may 
> find themselves.  Use of a ULA addressing space offers a locally 
> routable alternative without exposing these devices to the Internet. 
> Unfortunately, many in the homenet wg consider this to be a problem to 
> be resolved by the device rather than the homenet protocol.

Personally my thinking has been that the service discovery mechanisms and 
how wide the service discovery information is propagated (and wherefrom 
and who has access to the services themselves), would be up to policy in 
the homenet CPEs.

I have always envisioned a "control panel" for the home, where (new) 
devices pops up, and the user has to set up roles or equivalent for these 
devices, and the roles control how these devices and their services should 
be handled.

I would like to see a lot of this complexity done at the CPE (or a 
"homenet controller") and not in the individual device. The "controller" 
would own the policy settings that the user interacts with using for 
instance a smartphone app and/or a web page.

I have been meaning to write down use-cases and examples of my thoughts 
but I have not done this yet, but I should in the near future.

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: [e-mail]