In message <[email protected]> Joel jaeggli writes: > On 10/4/11 16:17 , james woodyatt wrote: > > On Oct 3, 2011, at 9:00 PM, 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. > > > > Those utility networks have a fundamental problem that I contend is > > beyond the scope and charter of HOMENET. > > every-time I connect my split-tunneled vpn to my home network, I am > attaching a non-dfz-connected inter-network behind my home network, I > don't think of this as rare or particularly exceptional problem (it's > not confined to utility networks). it does have the potential for > address collisions (as built currently)in ipv4 due to the extensive if > not quite complete use of rfc-1918 used within the scope of that private > internetwork.
Joel, Being new to this WG I may have it wrong, but a point of this WG may be to change the use of RFC1918 space to IPv6 space. For example, not only your computers, but your home thermostats, your electic meter, your entertainment systems, SIP phones, etc can each have global IPv6 addresses. Beats "go check the thermostat at 10.0.0.1" from your mobile phone. Authentication will be an issue for product (but from the charter, not in scope for the WG). With an IPv6 only home network you don't need to use rfc1918 number space. You can put your /64 behind a firewall if you like. You can use RFC3142 as one means to reach the IPv4 world at least for anything based on TCP (SMTP, HTTP, etc). Or you can use application gateways (what I use). The benefit over using net 10/8 or other rfc1918 space is that if your hosts at different sites use IPv6 and if your laptop in a IPv4 only site can at least get a 6to4 tunnel, you can use a globally routable IPv6 number space. Try using IPv6 instead of rfc1918. (for example, see mail headers). If the provider side of the WAN connection just hands the home router an IPv6 prefix, then some form of autoconfiguration is possible. If not, IPv4 rfc1918 autoconfiguration can be used with NAT unless a tunnel is configured. It wouldn't hurt to do both IPv4 rfc1918 autoconfiguration with NAT and IPv6 autoconfiguration with a native prefix or with a configured tunnel (or with 6to4 enabled). Curtis _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
