On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 07:04:01PM -0800, Michael Thomas wrote: > Lorenzo Colitti wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 10:57 AM, Michael Thomas <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > That's why we have ULAs and multiple prefixes. > > > > > > ULA's are of limited use. I still want to start my washing machine > > regardless of whether I'm at home or not. > > > > > > And you'll know the current IPv6 address of that washing machine how?
[...snip..] > Yes, NPTv6 as I recall begs the question of split resolvers and all of the > ickiness that brings with it. Fred can tell me I'm wrong if I'm wrong. > > > Exactly. This group can specify alternatives, and if they're good > > enough, they'll get used. > > I don't think that it's controversial to say that any solution that takes > into account the many things we want to accomplish is going to be complex. > Far more complex than what the average home-router-with-nat does right now. > Rube Goldberg is not our friend here. It scares me. Well, I wasn't able to find numbers on what percentage of CPEs is Linux-based these days, but, in all honesty, I think if there is a ready-made package for this, maybe even in OpenWRT, that will have a major impact on proliferation of pretty much anything in the CPE area. [...snip...] > > I don't know about naming and security, but renumbering works using > > address deprecation (that's been in the spec since forever), and since > > it's covered by RFC6204 and there are conformance tests for it, devices > > with the appropriate logo will support it. Support for prefix delegation > > across multiple routers is spotty, and there's no way to make it work in > > arbitrary topologies, but for what it's worth, I run it at home and it > > does work (my operator-provided CPE supports DHCPv6 PD and all I needed > > to do was plug in an IPv6-capable CPE). source+destination based routing > > has been demonstrated to work. > > Naming is the one thing I'm almost certain is out in la-la land even in the > big leagues. For home I'm pretty certain that handwaving would be a generous > description of the current state of affairs. And then there's securing things > which is always great for a good belly laugh. Indeed I have to agree on this one from practical experience. We've tried creating some kind of automatic IPv6 naming system at the local hackerspace - with 2 network software developers, no less - and failed. We're using SLAAC (which AFAIK is reasonable to expect in a homenet?) and a good percentage of our devices don't speak MDNS. We didn't even get as far as thinking about privacy addresses, we just failed to find any reasonable way to get names to start with... (Ok, well, maybe MDNS would've been the way to go... but, being targeted at local name resolution, this is nowhere near a turn-key solution for accessing a washing machine from the internet either.) -David _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
