Makes sense. Interesting topic, but significantly different. Might converge at some point, but not now.
On Mon, Aug 8, 2022 at 21:54 Michael Richardson <[email protected]> wrote: > > Marc Blanchet <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Also, because ICN does not involve making active (in the TCP sense) > >> connections to the sensors, it means that there is no inherent trust > >> that must be created in the sensors in order for them to > communicate: > >> they simply announce their state and allow the network to do its > >> thing. > > > I’m getting concerned that we are trying to boil the ocean. We should > > reduce the scope of this work to what is achievable. The proponents > > seemed to suggest a more narrow use case. > > I think that I should have also reported that nobody in the side meeting > through that it belonged as part of the SNAC work. > > -- > Michael Richardson <[email protected]> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting ) > Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide > > > > > _______________________________________________ > homenet mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet >
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
