On 2/22/13 7:24 AM, Michael Thomas wrote:
joel jaeggli wrote:
On 2/21/13 7:04 PM, Michael Thomas wrote:
So, I think what we can observe from the number of readily
discoverable security cameras on the internet. was that the real-live
requirement was at least partially solved thanks to upnp and dynamic
dns registration, is not a geek-only-oddity, survives renumbering,
and was for the most part done quite badly. hopefully it can be done
better in the future.
I was under the impression that upnp is exactly what we should not be
aspiring to,
but that we'll get by default (like natv6) if nothing useful happens
in ietf.
my point was not that upnp was worth aspiring too. it was that the
existence proof for servers in the home is all over the place even in
the the state of brokenness.
Mike
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
