I agree with Pascal. Thrashing for few years is not good. Just publish a short document for what the homenet routing requirements are and then let the IETF routing WG look into the issue.
So far, having worked with Ted privately, I see the requirements are: (a) A routing protocol to use on the wired link at home (b) Whatever routing is used on the wired link should also support the lossy wifi link in the home. (c) An average home has one wifi link. Any other requirements or changes to the above text? Based on the requirements above, I would use ISIS for (a) and configure a static route to the wifi link to deal with (b). Hemant -----Original Message----- From: homenet [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Pascal Thubert (pthubert) Sent: Sunday, July 26, 2015 3:18 PM To: Ted Lemon Cc: HOMENET; Mikael Abrahamsson; Gert Doering; Dino Farinacci; Terry Manderson Subject: Re: [homenet] Moving forward. Hello Ted: Seems that there's more work than what we can expect from a DT. Otherwise we'd be all set by now. What about forming a flash WG in routing area to see if: - we can extract requirements for home - there's such a thing as a one size fits all homes routing protocol - provide recommendations on how to use (a combination of) existing standards, and, if that can not be done,whether a new protocol is needed ROLL followed that path. _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
