IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Time to kill layer 2

Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com> Fri, 15 April 2016 19:56 UTC

Return-Path: <hallam@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D91D412DB89 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Apr 2016 12:56:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.4
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 nWcfG6-kk38H for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Apr 2016 12:56:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf0-x234.google.com (mail-lf0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CFF8412DA21 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Apr 2016 12:56:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf0-x234.google.com with SMTP id j11so157438551lfb.1 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Apr 2016 12:56:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc; bh=uEx9AT+ZILr8qY9K9O9wvyV8QhoSA8ThHxrT0HkP1r4=; b=FMtz2+56opSdVyhaO6TtsfVLioGbW1jTZoR9P87oZTDufHpk/sBM9FohQ7rGUQd7WQ ibrn+LjWqJ7vot++FBwEO5XKVsTpOcLfdfEIDI2s2dkJjQfUwyMxwQ9xx+iPLR3zOZqj XJjqViExN5P7y+/Ii6sjwMOYvpQI9FFHRrhcouiizcoUOgUoF16DxsWonYiwLDIYWgFl XhAW2cVAda4WKxUOR/hauzR9lNGmXhgsp3CoaGBGz5A9welI9M7DAmL9q48vM9X8ROwO aL8QIrZfJtqHfwlT8T8OKw+SrgCm27eVnIsB45zYJP31ghuVzartbT7ENz3rOKBQVLxt 9X6w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=uEx9AT+ZILr8qY9K9O9wvyV8QhoSA8ThHxrT0HkP1r4=; b=TmnWnFIhZktvW3Vuw+oFalG3I71/HA89r7XgE66nR5Ve8pffecfWBAV46Sc87k/r+Z 2OE5kGOUWCBTVcxHEe7Fga0fBQAEFerNySBJzxSc4qYyseSOpjnHd9pCPwe8CtQNPiJE ksnkARkDRI2f8gI+0IXA5uNNbAkh64Y5KHjVn5VhDtWwx1D5FByl4DLemsSGAwYequ1S jeZHBMFQSzRADpweQwk/d4DAKQLyq1Zj2NM2NSiNm87GFWiyPs8UpvzgmxMW5jxUxv4L tg1H1ZfRO+Bzk1KDRBeCNYkrUcgYVwEStXm42Fek9zZyEtOYEG+ncWEKeANQRE9LIfGa tdiA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FXehNWV/39UxtC9t/qOLy0qkWOGJLymp3KGNWd997z/hbgenxtEQa3UgUM1NuHRpiaToLgernEXqaeq5A==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.25.162.20 with SMTP id l20mr8057509lfe.43.1460750160953; Fri, 15 Apr 2016 12:56:00 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: hallam@gmail.com
Received: by 10.112.3.102 with HTTP; Fri, 15 Apr 2016 12:56:00 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAPt1N1kNAU+iKhFycE2mO3gjOh-43pRRxA3NpTyi3+A=x-85QQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAMm+Lwg-HTYCv2pGt=SP2+Xjoko6GcJ73kVzqXC1LBTOMDKV_A@mail.gmail.com> <CB8FC0F5-DD04-4478-AC41-09B4F8BA583B@asgard.org> <CAMm+LwiymMc=mqqdj9hupG7AoJMCxxJY7oz7DAX6K1zJ6H3g9g@mail.gmail.com> <CAPt1N1kNAU+iKhFycE2mO3gjOh-43pRRxA3NpTyi3+A=x-85QQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2016 15:56:00 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: QUt3QdjtdTaKD_dZ9klSAifjG9U
Message-ID: <CAMm+LwihFcmjEGCtALQmyUVXxKfbo-0CJYAbhNjMJ4To60Ab3w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Time to kill layer 2
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>
To: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/Ri6NCXtp9FQBIg8Qxtx86fhuCR0>
Cc: IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2016 19:56:05 -0000

Any time you eliminate use of ASN.1, it is a win.

On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 11:36 AM, Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> wrote:
> There's a very interesting discussion about NetJSON as a management strategy
> for homenets going on on the babel mailing list right now.   There is a very
> cool but not very informative demo here:
> http://ninux-graph.netjson.org/topology/e384464c-d1d2-4af3-aae1-4e852a28d956/
>
> The thread is here:
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?email_list=babel&gbt=1&index=MSVfepqNBnEahhioJocbbCqHODg
>
> (Subject line: NetJSON outreach)
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 11:29 AM, Phillip Hallam-Baker
> <phill@hallambaker.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Time Warner Cable <Lee@asgard.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > On 4/14/16, 8:59 AM, "ietf on behalf of Phillip Hallam-Baker"
>> > <ietf-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of phill@hallambaker.com> wrote:
>>
>> >>All this networking gear is presented to me as black boxes over which
>> >>I have absolutely no control (which is fine-ish) and no visibility.
>> >
>> > What visibility do you want? Error messages on the printer's console?
>> > Syslog messages?
>> > SNMP traps? Oh, apparently not, since "SNMP isn't available most
>> > ordinary people."
>>
>> What I would like is something like a WiFi certification scheme that
>> means 'there is a collection of technology here that is sufficient and
>> complete'.
>>
>> Right now I would have to pay a ridiculous amount of money to get SNMP
>> support because it is positioned as a differentiator between SOHO and
>> 'enterprise' class devices.
>>
>> Getting the feedback necessary to make it work should not be an
>> 'enterprise' feature.
>>
>>
>> >>What should have happened many moons ago was that DHCP should have
>> >>become a bidirectional protocol or a bootstrap to a bidirectional
>> >>protocol. So when a printer joins the network, it authenticates and
>> >>tells the network what it is. And this is all defined in one set of
>> >>specifications from one organization, none of which assumes that
>> >>security is an 'advanced', 'optional' or 'enterprise' feature.
>> >
>> > See Homenet.
>>
>> That seems to be premised on the assumption that the home network will
>> be a simplified version of today's enterprise network rather than
>> having far more moving parts.
>>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email