On 8/8/12 5:32 AM, David R Oran wrote: >> That browser-centric view of the world knows nothing about .local. > What browser are you using? Safari and I think Chrome know about .local just fine.
I'm talking about people, not technology. People know nothing of this, and would be confused that they need to type in weatherstation.local, and doubly more confused by why it doesn't work once they leave the house. It just doesn't map to the way people view naming anymore. >> Nor >> do I want to learn about .local either. I want to have a real name that I >> can use as a real URL to send -- as I just did -- to people that might want >> to see my weather station. And I want -- literally -- for my mother to be >> able to do the same. It is beyond her now. >> > For that you definitely need a global DNS domain registration, so we've cycled back to where we started - things you want to be accessed globally from anywhere on the internet need global names that can be resolved from anywhere on the internet. The global namespace is what people have been taught in the last 20 years and almost nobody remembers NBP. I think that it is an important requirement that we do not mess with people's mental model of what we've forced upon them which is the global DNS. .[site]local fails on that account. When I type an address (or better, search) in a location bar, I want it to seem like it's an fqdn even if it's walled off from the rest of the world -- people understand firewalls to a degree -- and perhaps even if it's a locally synthesized fqdn (ie, camping on a name that I don't have registered). I don't want to think about the antiquated notion of filtering by categories that I didn't create and probably make no sense to me whatsoever as there becomes a vast array of internet-enabled widgets in the house. >> So there's one problem. >> > Yes, and a fairly hard one given the manual/administrative nature of domain registrations and the geek factor of secure dynamic DNS updates for all services to the global There's much that could be done to make this seamless, and probably many business opportunities given that. The main problem right now is that we don't have a very big internet that supports this feature. Once the v6 internet gets to a critical mass, there will be a land rush of purpose built widgets vying for their homenet acreage. I think it would be extremely short sighted to blow that off as "too hard" because it's not, and especially if we stop spending an inordinate amount of brain cycles trying to do unnatural acts with a naming mechanism that nobody even knows about. Mike _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
