One way to automate this would be using mud. On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 9:28 AM, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farr...@cs.tcd.ie> wrote:
> > (with no hats...) > > On 19/07/18 10:42, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: > > >> Also, think of the privacy implications if all of the services on the > >> homenet had to be discovered from a shared zone like dyndns.org. > > > Quite the opposite. In the trivial update protocol, the update is > > end-to-end, encrypted, and only the host and the DNS provider see the > > data. Every Homenet, every host, heck, even every application can use > > a different DNS provider, and each DNS provider only sees the data that > > was explicitly sent to it. > > I'm also a bit puzzled by how the subset of records to be > globally published relates to the set of records that are > to be internally visible. I guess this is not something > that we'd fully standardise, but there are privacy issues > here if too much gets published globally, so there may be > some protocol (change/tweak) required to make it possible > for implementers to distinguish which information ought be > globally visible, and which not. > > Cheers, > S. >
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
