On 03/13/2013 04:54 PM, Tim Chown wrote:
On 13 Mar 2013, at 22:49, Michael Thomas <[email protected]> wrote:
On 03/13/2013 03:39 PM, Don Sturek wrote:
Hi Mike,
I think disconnected use is a MUST and not aspirational.
I would not want my networked printer to stop working, my smart appliances
to not be able to read my meter, etc. all because my ISP decided to do
some maintenance.
Ok, let's assume it's a MUST. That seems to imply that when I'm
at home I want my CER to serve up RR's for my domain, but when
I'm away something in the cloud is serving up my RR's because
I don't want to deal with DoS against my CER, etc, etc.
This is an issue discussed in the mglt-homenet-front-end-naming-delegation and
mglt-homenet-naming-delegation drafts. Though those specific references will
be removed from the final text.
Maybe it would be better if you broke the mdns and dns into separate
subsections?
It's a little hard to follow because they're two pretty different approaches
and it
all gets sort of confused.
Why will they be removed? Because you don't want to reference an ID?
If your CER is being DOSed though, chances are you may not be able to access
any home services anyway?
I think the larger issue is that I'd really rather have some critical services
like DNS professionally managed and administered. I'm ok with a toy DNS
that's inward facing and thus not having to withstand frontal assaults, but
beyond that I'd rather not have to wonder if it's been patched for the newest
race that somebody finds and looses on the net...
Mike
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
