IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com> Wed, 15 October 2014 23:15 UTC

Return-Path: <mike@mtcc.com>
X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4961F1ACDA2 for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 16:15:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.118
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.118 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_ALL=0.8, PLING_QUERY=0.994, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=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 fKqyRXFv-5cJ for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 16:15:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mtcc.com (mtcc.com [50.0.18.224]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5CC9F1ACDFA for <homenet@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 16:15:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.1.10.18] (c-50-148-182-215.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [50.148.182.215]) (authenticated bits=0) by mtcc.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id s9FNFauc005025 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 16:15:36 -0700
Message-ID: <543F0013.8000400@mtcc.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 16:15:31 -0700
From: Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: homenet@ietf.org
References: <CAAedzxp1R-C5E9RJVMVLRJxPc0w4zooPtqnvWK9eggpZu4=xtg@mail.gmail.com> <C7F3DE60-F596-4BAD-9C28-74006966E5B9@fugue.com> <20141014142746.GX31092@Space.Net> <69B1F2CB-88C6-4211-83F3-11C8A3E7BFD2@fugue.com> <20141014145930.GY31092@Space.Net> <m1Xe3jL-0000I7C@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <20141014154111.GZ31092@Space.Net> <C6760B68-C913-4B22-98E6-6D29A66F80D9@fugue.com> <20141015150422.GW31092@Space.Net> <4E2E154E-D231-4E79-860A-56948A13CDD4@fugue.com> <20141015154841.GY31092@Space.Net> <CBC8A3D9-9EBD-47FF-B066-247898FF2000@fugue.com> <543EA248.2080700@mtcc.com> <CB50B30B-DC36-4354-96B7-19AE415BD03F@fugue.com> <543EBE40.3030201@mtcc.com> <BA5ABBFA-9D13-4975-A96C-530FE958322A@fugue.com> <543ED2A7.3090409@mtcc.com> <1569644A-50C4-47B6-908E-262BC62BCD14@fugue.com> <543EFBF1.6040101@mtcc.com> <457D177C-232E-4590-A9ED-80048140157F@fugue.com>
In-Reply-To: <457D177C-232E-4590-A9ED-80048140157F@fugue.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/w7Vvxpq89PumLx6Jfq9ma6g5y4k
Subject: Re: [homenet] Let's make in-home ULA presence a MUST !?
X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: <homenet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 23:15:38 -0000

On 10/15/14, 4:06 PM, Ted Lemon wrote:
> On Oct 15, 2014, at 5:57 PM, Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com> wrote:
>> 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.
> You appear to have some misconceptions both about how IP routing works and how streaming works.
>
> Suppose you are connected to your homenet.   You are streaming video from your jukebox using your ULA.   Now your device switches to your neighbor's Wifi, which is advertising a different GUA and a different ULA.   At this point your device does a flash renumber because it realizes it's no longer on the same network, and that the prefixes it had are no longer valid.

I'm talking about the server, not the client. ULA == unreachable on my 
neighbor's wifi.
Don't want assumptions that servers on my home network will only be 
reachable by ULA's.

Mike

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email