On 10/3/11 21:00 , Thomas Herbst wrote: > There will be wide area network providers who interwork with the home > network but do not provide global connectivity. Two mentioned so far > are utility networks and 3g providers. One of the outputs of the wg > should be to define how they should be configured to perform their > role without messing up Internet communication. > > A wg Chair from the Internet area did accuse me of "breaking the > Internet model" because the utility networks my company builds do not > provide global connectivity to users with our 100kb to the node.
not all (inter)networks provide internet connectivity. something more pretty than the 250+ routes my split-tunnel ssl vpn client just installed when it came up would be appreciated. defusing knowledge about avail destinations is why we want routing in the first place. > tom > > ________________________________________ From: > [email protected] [[email protected]] On Behalf Of Erik > Nordmark [[email protected]] Sent: Monday, October 03, 2011 6:46 PM > To: Ray Hunter Cc: Tim Chown; [email protected] Subject: Re: [homenet] > Homenet Architecture & Interim Meeting > > On 9/21/11 1:19 PM, Ray Hunter wrote: >> 1) I contend that multi-homing is probably going to become the >> "norm" in Europe by 2022, due to The European Electricity and Gas >> Directive. That corresponds at least to picture 4, if not more. > > If we believe that multi-homing will be more common, then I think we > need to understand what the constraints are for the multihoming in > particular as this relates to walled gardens. I can see many > different possibilities, which imply different requirements. > > 1. Just two paths to the Internet; the home gets one PA prefix from > each ISP. > > 2. Like #1 but in addition the ISPs run ingress filtering so that > the source address in a packet from the home has to match the prefix > that ISP delegated. > > 3. Like #1, but there are QoS guarantees for traffic local to an > ISP. Thus a host in the home can connect to foo.ispA.net over either > ISP-A or ISP-B, but gets better voice/video quality when doing it > over ISP-A's connection. > > 4. Looking up foo.ispA.net works when asking the DNS server at > ISP-A, but fails (NXDOMAIN) when asking ISP-B. > > 5. The lookup of foo.ispA.net works over either DNS and returns the > same IP address, but fails (due to firewalls) for packets that are > sent out via ISP-B. > > 6. The lookup of foo.ispA.net works over either DNS and returns the > same IP address, but the application-layer content is completely > different (e.g., a "subscriber" view when connecting over the ISP-A > connection). > > 7. The lookup of foo.ispA.net returns different IP addresses when > asking ISP-A vs. ISP-B. > > > Do we really want to solve all those problems in homenet? We can't > tell the difference between behavior #1 and #6 at the IP layer. > > Erik _______________________________________________ homenet mailing > list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet > _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list > [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet > _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
