The problem is that you are assuming (a) that only geeks will ever want remotely-addressable networks (and hence, we don't need to specify a mechanism for automatically setting that up, because they can do it manually), and (b) that no network will ever go from being locally-addressed to globally-addressed.
Both of these are self-fulfilling prophecies that I would like to prevent fulfilling themselves. Oh, and (c) that a person with a local-only homenet will never take their laptop or cell phone to someone else's house where a naming scheme conflict happens to exist, and accidentally tweak something because of the clash. Global naming implies state, among other things. mDNS is sort of stateless, except of course that it's not completely stateless, and breaks badly in some cases when you treat it as if it is. So state is, IMHO, a better solution even in the local-only situation, because you're owning the fact that you have state, and you have to go to the trouble to get it right. And it has a clean upgrade path to the local/remote situation. And it doesn't surprise anyone with naming clashes when visiting the neighbors' network. _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
