On 03/13/2013 11:20 AM, Tim Chown wrote:
There should be some more discussion of the differences between a locally
significant domain name, and a globally significant one. What happens
when people camp on names they don't own? How might that interact with
mobility?
Not sure what you mean here.
If I own my CER and it hosts a DNS repository and doles itself out as
the name server via slaac/dhcp, I can set my namespace up to be pretty
much whoever i'd like to be. If I want my homenet to be jethrotull.com,
I can do that even though I don't control the global name. Are there
implications for that? Might we try to convince router manufacturers
to not allow you to do that (at least easily)? What happens if my
neighbor attaches to my fake jethrotull.com? Any weirdness there?
Mike
More speculation about dnydns without any motivation for why it's interesting
and/or significant.
There seems to be no mention of the relationship between local/home resolvers
if the local resolver isn't the authoritative resolver. In particular, it's not
an
unusual situation to have a "cloud" (read: high bandwidth, well connected...)
authoritative dns be a slave to a local master. Or if you don't like that, some
other way to achieve similar goals of not wanting my home network have to
know how to deal with ddos's on nameservers, as one for-instance.
I think that's not precluded. The key bit is the homenet must be able to
operate if disconnected.
3.7.5 Independent Operation
I'm generally skeptical that anything these days works well when you pull
the plug on the Internet. There are so many hidden assumptions about
connectivity that I don't think we should try to do anything heroic here.
Sure. It's a fair goal though.
3.7.6 Considerations for LLN's
First I'll say that it's not just LLN's that have problems with chatty networks:
it's anything with a battery. This should be rewritten from that perspective and
stay away from speculation about whether proxies are needed for a particular
technology that doesn't necessarily have consensus.
More to the point: this architecture should have considerations throughout about
battery driven devices and their considerations, and not just whether mdns will
cause daily trips to the store to buy new batteries.
One for Anders to comment on, perhaps...
3.7.7 DNS resolver discovery
I don't understand this section: is there anything we need to do beyond what
SLAAC and/or DHCP do now? If there is, it might be nice to enumerate what
the problem is.
This came up from Jari's own experiments. It implies stateless DHCP is
available, or that the resolver address(es) are propagated by some other means.
---
Overall, section 3.7 leaves me more confused than enlightened. It reads more
like a stream of consciousness than an architecture.
For the reason Ted has observed. I agree it needs to be tighter, preferably.
tim
Mike
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
