On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 2:40 PM, Tim Chown <[email protected]> wrote: <snip>
> From the perspective of the interim meeting, I believe the agenda of that > meeting includes slots for each of the five requirements (routing, naming, > security, etc) so we should be agreeing as much as we can at the very least > on the general principles we will follow for those slots, if not the > architecture in full. The biggest problem I've run into when talking about future homenet similar scenarios are the why part. Why will the future be so different from today? Minor issue and not sure if it's in the scope, however, the first question I get from almost all that are new to IPv6 are why do we need more than one /64, why will/should there be more than one LAN at home? Some of them are fairly technical to. And (maybe) another scenario, can we assume all home networks will/should (not) communicate with each other? The fridge with the TV or the computer, power/lights with the TV. I can image having quite a few network setups at home and all of them sharing the same Internet access but no communication between each other. All computer isolated on a few LAN, one DMZ, one guest network and then a few more dedicated to different devices that are interconnected... How should the be isolated from each other and how should that be addressed? Several firewall instances on different "interfaces" on the router? Guess scenario 3 are the closest to what I'm thinking of... ... other than that, good start to get the ball rolling :) -- Roger Jorgensen | [email protected] | - IPv6 is The Key! http://www.jorgensen.no | [email protected] _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
