On 06/29/2012 08:34 AM, Ralph Droms wrote:
a) Homenet name-service MUST NOT interfere with Internet name-service
"Internet name-service"? Do you mean "DNS"? "Co-exist" might be a
better word. Users want a single interface into naming and don't
want to have to differentiate between "naming stuff on my local network"
and "naming stuff in the Internet". Ted Lemon raised this issue much
more eloquently during the WG meeting.
I'll add my first bullet here, rephrased a little:
a.1) Relative name resolution: some naming convention that allows name
resolution while mitigating the need to know an absolute location in the
Internet name-service
b) Homenet name-service MUST NOT be in Internet name space.
How are things in the home identified from outside the homenet?
Maybe I can add some fuel to Olafur's fire. I'd like to say that the
homenet name service MUST be DNS.
This may sound like heresy, but here's my reason: I want the ability
to transition from a private name space to a public name space with
minimal fuss. I don't want a different naming mechanism that has
its own oddities just because I can't think up a clever domain name
for my home net that goes into the global DNS when I'm forced to
install my router. When I'm finally inspired, I want to be able to make
that transition and then worry about the split horizon implications
(if I even get around to caring about such a thing).
So perhaps, we can make use of statistically unique naming to keep
things from bumping into one another, etc... this is sort of off the cuff,
but the real point is not having to transmogrify one naming scheme into
another. Yuck.
Mike
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
