Ted Lemon <mailto:[email protected]>
11 May 2016 18:37
> I don't like the hybrid proxy model either. It promises the union of
> the problems and intersection of the functionality. Proxying
flies in
> the face of the trend of smart devices and dumb networks.
Very well put.
Be that as it may, Homenet in general flies in the face of that trend.
And if you think about it, that trend isn't really a very smart
trend, because the burden it places on devices is extreme, and not all
devices have infinite resources to spend mapping the network and
figuring out how to publish their services on it.
But if we were to build a smart network from scratch, I also wouldn't
start with proxies, nor maintain a distributed database in the hosts.
I'd start with letting the routers build a naming infra, together with
defining a (simple) name registration protocol between host and on-link
router(s) (together with conflict resolution to communicate "sorry, that
names already taken")
And the starting point would then probably be HNCP + DNS to elect a max
of 'n' authoritative name servers per homenet, where 'n' NS and AAAA
records can fit it a single UDP packet.
So whether you prefer a "smart host" or "smart network" model, hybrid
proxies seem a poor compromise.
--
regards,
RayH
<https://www.postbox-inc.com/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=siglink&utm_campaign=reach>
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
