The homenet argument, is that there is already typically dozens of routing like devices in the home today, and double/triple nat often resulting from misconfiguration.
Townsley makes the arguement coherently in the video I mentioned earlier. If you can take 15 minutes out of your day to watch that, perhaps the point will be made. Notably bridging ethernet to zigbee and sensor networks (and wifi, to a large extent) is an horrifically bad idea. (IMHO). There are people strongly in favor of using Rbridges in that situation... Short term, finding ways to avoid double-triple-nat would be an improvement on how things work. In my own case I worry more about small business than home networks. Once you fall off the cliff of bridging, the route towards routing is hard. And I'm totally in love with the idea of getting multiple uplinks to different providers to "just work". On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 11:02 AM, Mike O'Dell <[email protected]> wrote: > > excuse my naivete, but why on earth is homenet worried about > "interior routers"? there shouldn't *be* any interior routers > in a home network. ethernet switches, sure, but not routers. > > -mo > _______________________________________________ > Cerowrt-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel -- Dave Täht NSFW: https://w2.eff.org/Censorship/Internet_censorship_bills/russell_0296_indecent.article _______________________________________________ Cerowrt-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
