On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 5:01 PM, Michael Thomas <[email protected]> wrote: > On 11/13/2012 12:24 AM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >> >> On 12/11/2012 17:33, Mark Townsley wrote: >>> >>> Nice to see a constructive thread with suggested text for the editors of >>> the homenet arch, thank you. >>> >>> I'm concerned with any "issue a warning" type suggestions though. We are >>> working hard to develop automatic configuration that assumes there is no >>> operator involved here. If there is no operator to configure our protocols, >>> there is no operator to issue a warning to either. >>> >>> If the homenet runs out of /64s to hand out, and we recommend not to >>> route /128s, bridge, NPTv6, etc... then the final option is, simply, "no >>> IPv6" for that given link. Falling back to the user to try and interpret a >>> cryptic message about IPv6 prefixes is simply not a realistic option for the >>> protocols we are working on here. >> >> Which is a FAIL if there are any v6-only devices around. Ultimately I >> don't see >> how you can avoid some kind of warning to the user, even if it's the >> equivalent >> of the beeping from a smoke detector whose battery is fading. >> > > I too am bothered quite a lot by the notion that nothing will ever go wrong > therefore we don't have to plan for it. With the complexity of networks > being > contemplated here, I think the likelihood that they will self-organize and > just > "work" completely unattended in all/most cases asymptotically approaches > zero. > We simply have no empirical evidence that any such thing has ever been done, > and plenty of evidence that even given huge amounts of networking clue that > awful things happen awfully often. > > What really bothers me is that routers are treated as "others": the notion > that > normal people are not just expected to have no clue about networking, but > that they should be actively prevented from gaining clue by interacting with > their infrastructure. I really think that's wrongheaded. While I think that > a > beeping box is a horrible idea, I wouldn't be adverse to my box, say, > sending > me email alerting me to what is wrong, and how I might fix it. There are > probably > many other ways to deal with this too, and the problem isn't limited to > routers > but all headless boxen -- though routers may have some unique properties.
+1 One of the innovations in cerowrt is that it includes a mini-jabber server, to which a given user could subscribe, for critical messages. > Mike > _______________________________________________ > homenet mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet -- Dave Täht Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt: http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.html _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
