Re: [homenet] Kathleen Moriarty's Discuss on draft-ietf-homenet-hncp-09: (with DISCUSS)

[Juliusz Chroboczek <[e-mail]>]

>> That's very well put, and exactly what I'm trying to explain to the
>> community.  Please help me do that rather than adding to the perception
>> that HNCP contains dozens of random, arbitrary requirements.

> That's what I thought I was doing by writing that message!  I am not
> sure it's helpful for me to pop up on the olsr mailing list

You already know that, Ted, but I'd like to clarify for the list.

It's not a simple matter of sending a few mailing list messages -- it's
a long-term effort that consists of writing portable, open source,
lightweight implementations (hnetd, shncpd), of deploying HNCP ourselves
(Paris network, Henning's network somewhere in Germany), of getting HNCP
implementations into Linux and Unix distributions (OpenWRT by Steven,
Debian/Ubuntu soon, I'm not telling), of speaking to people at community
meetings (Battlemesh, IETF, CCC, FOSDEM), in short, making HNCP familiar
and easily available.

(And as we're trying to communicate our message in a clear and accurate
manner, how helpful it is to be able to say that a feature is "mandatory
to implement, optional to use, but you're not allowed to #ifdef it away".)

-- Juliusz