> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of 
> Ray
> Bellis
> Sent: Friday, August 05, 2011 10:58 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [homenet] Homenet Architecture Draft
>
> We currently have draft-arkko-townsley-homenet-arch-00 as a candidate for our 
> first
> chartered WG item.
>
> To ensure we can maintain some inertia following our session in Quebec, it 
> would be
> appreciated if members could  review this document.

ISTR mention of an interim meeting, but haven't heard anything since Quebec.

> I'd especially like to see some feedback on ยง3.2 "Principles" since I get the 
> impression that
> some of those may be quite contentious.

OK:
Largest Possible Subnets.
I disagree with this principle.  Why is switching (or bridging) better than 
routing?
Is policy easier to write for MAC addresses than IP addresses?  Is the network 
more
resilient to devices (including other routers) being added, removed, 
interconnected,
or moved?
One should have more than a /64 per interface, so when a new router is joined, 
it can
get a prefix, rather than reconfiguring addressing throughout the home.

Transparent end-to-end.
Yes, as long as "addressable" != "reachable".  We are not ruling out ACLs or 
firewalls.
I will return to the firewall diatribe, if I must.  "Administratively 
unreachable" is
transparent, altered IP headers are not.

IP Connectivity between All Nodes.  Inconsistent with the above, and 
inconsistent
with any kind of security policy (e.g., don't let guests reach my file share).
Says, "IP-layer connectivity" then says "at the link layer where  possible".  I 
thought
those were different layers.

Intelligent Policy.  I don't know what this section means.  No QoS, WRED, or 
AQM?

There's a terminology difference between fun-multi-router and 
homenet-architecutre:
is a LAN a single segment, or a home-area network?

Lee

This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable 
proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to 
copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for 
the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not 
the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any 
dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the 
contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be 
unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender 
immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and 
any printout.
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet

Reply via email to