Michael Richardson <[email protected]> wrote:
    >> progress the stub networks draft because I've been too busy doing
    >> dnssd work, but that would be an example. I'd really like to progress
    >> that draft /somewhere/, and it seems a /bit/ off-topic for dnssd. It
    >> could go in v6ops, but it's pretty off-topic for v6ops. Same with
    >> intarea.

    >> But of course the stub networks document isn't what Homenet set out to
    >> do.  It's just a building block that might lead there. The original
    >> work of homenet doesn't seem to have caught on in the market, and I
    >> think it's because we didn't have an adoption strategy. Personally I
    >> think stub networks is a good bottom-up beginning to a strategy that
    >> could ultimately produce an adoptable version of what we originally
    >> tried to do. But again, only if people here want to pursue that.

    > I thought that you *wanted* to go to INTAREA with this document.  I
    > agree that it's an important document.

If we need to keep HOMENET open to do stub networks, then let's do that.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet

Reply via email to