Re: [homenet] HNCP

On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 1:22 PM, Townsley.net <mark@townsley.net> wrote:
>
>
>> Personally, I was very skeptical when the team let me know that the result of their analysis led them to the need to create HNCP.

I am delighted to see the work. Unfortunately I haven't had time to
review the draft fully or much of the code as yet; it was quite the
surprise to see it! It was wonderful to see the git clone...

What I looked over appeared to be a massive step forward that can
break the logjam here, evolve rapidly,
and be deployed rapidly.

I'm not sure if it's an AHCP replacement (can I get a /128 somewhere a
few hops away?)

I am glad there is room in the protocol for other routing protocols.
Have the RPL (IoT) folk had a gander?

In the 5 minutes I had with it, I felt the crypto architecture needed
fleshing out, and I wondered if there
was a notion of "distance". (to explain that, take a network with two
multihomed egress points and dozens of routers in between. Fully
distributing both sets of prefixes in an entirely flat fashion might
not be feasible or necessary.)

Unlike some perhaps I'd like to solve at least a few ipv4 related
problems, notably nat detection and saner rfc1918 prefix distribution,
but I imagine that will be a rathole.

Lastly: Trickle is very cool.

> I forgot to add that, after looking deeper  into what had actually been done, I warmed up to the idea greatly. That's just me though...I look forward to what others think here.
>
> - Mark
>
> _______________________________________________
> homenet mailing list
> homenet@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet

-- 
Dave Täht

Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt: http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.html