[homenet] soliciting ideas for "CeroWrt II"

Probably some of you remember "cerowrt", which was a project jim gettys and I spawned to solve the home router disaster. Our original project plan was here: https://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/make-wifi-fast/wiki/Solving_the_Home_Router_Disaster_Annotated/ Indirectly that project spawned the

[homenet] https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-mboned-ieee802-mcast-problems-09.txt

has anyone here had much chance to review this? -- Dave Täht CTO, TekLibre, LLC http://www.teklibre.com Tel: 1-831-205-9740 ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet

[homenet] althea presentation on isp in a box at nanog 76

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4EKbgShyLw Interesting stuff - wireguard, fq_codel/sch_cake, babel with new metric that allows for cryptocurrency traffic billing. -- Dave Täht CTO, TekLibre, LLC http://www.teklibre.com Tel: 1-831-205-9740 ___

Re: [homenet] Reducing IETF scope in response to market forces

On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 3:34 PM Stephen Farrell wrote: > > > Hiya, > > (With homenet co-chair hat on...) > > On 12/05/2019 07:33, Dave Taht wrote: > > To avoid howling > > here I'll skip mentioning the dozens I have on my list, and just pick > > on

[homenet] integrating homenet with multiple OSes

If anyone would like to talk to how to integrate homenet's stuff with existing OSes, there is still a call for proposals out here ending aug 1. https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2016-July/037235.html For systemd. (*please* don't turn this fora into a debate about systemd's

Re: [homenet] Linux 6724 rule 5.5 (Re: draft-bowbakova-rtgwg-enterprise-pa-multihoming-00)

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 8:39 PM, David Lamparter wrote: > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 09:49:46AM +0200, Lorenzo Colitti wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 2:54 PM, David Lamparter wrote: >> > Hence, I hacked it up for the Linux (4.5.0) kernel; patches are

[homenet] netdevconf talk submissions due before dec 20th

http://www.netdevconf.org/1.1/submit-proposal.html The actual conference is feb 10-12 in spain. I am curious if anyone has tried to present the homenet architecture to a concentrated audience of linux devs yet? (not that I want to! I have a different talk to give). I liked mark's talk about the

Re: [homenet] New Version Notification for draft-barth-homenet-wifi-roaming-00.txt

On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 2:40 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > On Thu, 26 Nov 2015, Michael Thomas wrote: > >> Even if it's a 1/2 second, the l2 handover is still far too long for, say, >> real time flows. Isn't this why you want to do make-before-break if at all >> possible? at

Re: [homenet] New Version Notification for draft-barth-homenet-wifi-roaming-00.txt

On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson <swm...@swm.pp.se> wrote: > On Mon, 30 Nov 2015, Dave Taht wrote: > >> Well, in the two or more radio (2.4 and 5ghz) case, you can easily roam >> between the two radios with many chipsets. Some chipsets only allow one &

Re: [homenet] New Version Notification for draft-barth-homenet-wifi-roaming-00.txt

Dave Täht Let's go make home routers and wifi faster! With better software! https://www.gofundme.com/savewifi On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 8:33 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > On Fri, 27 Nov 2015, Ray Hunter (v6ops) wrote: > >> How would you "move a /64 around"? > > > Well, the

Re: [homenet] New Version Notification for draft-barth-homenet-wifi-roaming-00.txt

On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Steven Barth wrote: > > > On 30.11.2015 13:24, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: >> You still have to sync all information between all HNCP speakers anyway >> in order to facilitate fast handover, both for /128 and /64 solution. > > That's not correct.

Re: [homenet] ISIS wifi testing

Dave Täht I just lost five years of my life to making wifi better. And, now... the FCC wants to make my work, illegal for people to install. https://www.gofundme.com/savewifi On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 5:53 PM, Gabriel Kerneis wrote: > On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 5:50 PM, Mikael

Re: [homenet] How many people have installed the homenet code?

On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 4:09 AM, Douglas Otis <doug.mtv...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On 10/21/15 5:29 PM, Dave Taht wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 5:19 PM, Henning Rogge <hro...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Dave Taht <dave.t...

Re: [homenet] How many people have installed the homenet code?

/CakeTechnical On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 5:19 PM, Henning Rogge <hro...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Dave Taht <dave.t...@gmail.com> wrote: >> is it up from 8? >> >> Dave Täht > > I did experiments in the CORE network emulator with shncpd... not s

Re: [homenet] How many people have installed the homenet code?

On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 5:19 PM, Henning Rogge <hro...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Dave Taht <dave.t...@gmail.com> wrote: >> is it up from 8? >> >> Dave Täht > > I did experiments in the CORE network emulator with shncpd... not s

Re: [homenet] ISIS wifi testing

flent.org, dude, has tons of tests, lovely graphs, and so on.The rrul test was the one intended for 802.11e in the first place. the rtt_fairness tests are good for testing what happens when routing happens. On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 3:59 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > > Hello. >

Re: [homenet] Yang based host IP subsystem configuration for dynamic QoS management and service chaining purpose

Well, if you can figure out some way to make it interface properly with the cake code (successor to fq_codel), I'm all for it. http://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/codel/wiki/CakeTechnical On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 4:00 PM, Maxim Klyus wrote: > Dear Netmod, Homenet and MIF. >

[homenet] hncpd home site?

wasn't there a website for hncpd and friends? homewrt.org? something like that? can't find it with various google searches -- Dave Täht endo is a terrible disease: http://www.gofundme.com/SummerVsEndo ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org

Re: [homenet] hncpd home site?

On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 3:44 AM, Ray Bellis <r...@bellis.me.uk> wrote: > > > On 08/09/2015 11:42, Dave Taht wrote: >> wasn't there a website for hncpd and friends? homewrt.org? something >> like that? can't find it with various google searches > > That's the c

Re: [homenet] question: equal-cost multipath?

On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 9:43 AM, Ted Lemon mel...@fugue.com wrote: On Aug 25, 2015, at 11:46 AM, Alia Atlas akat...@gmail.com wrote: ECMP or downstream paths is not a research project; it is common used technology. When the traffic streams desired are larger than can fit across a single

Re: [homenet] [babel] Experiences implementing Babel in the Bird routing daemon

On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 9:26 PM, Juliusz Chroboczek j...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr wrote: Over the last couple of weeks, I've amused myself with doing a clean-slate implementation of the Babel protocol in the Bird routing daemon Excellent news, Toke. I've had a first read over your code, and

Re: [homenet] NTP in Homenet?

On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 3:21 PM, Juliusz Chroboczek j...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr wrote: Either use the pool or use one from an SNTP DHCP option an edge router received from an ISP and published in HNCP. Ah, silly me. Yes, of course, we're already publishing DHCP(v6) options. RFC 7084

Re: [homenet] question: equal-cost multipath?

On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 3:46 PM, Juliusz Chroboczek j...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr wrote: ECMP could be one component in this going forward. Why are you so opposed to [t]his I'm not opposed to ECMP, quite the opposite, I think it would be a fun thing to implement. I'm trying to understand

[homenet] making wifi better (was: Despair)

I am delighted to see a cross layer conversation on wifi finally taking place here. I gave a talk at last weeks battlemesh about a few of the things in the pipeline to improve it: https://plus.google.com/u/0/107942175615993706558/posts/W5tynWhK8v1 The fun part, where I lay out one of the big

Re: [homenet] Moving forward.

On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 10:07 AM, Erik Kline e...@google.com wrote: On 29 July 2015 at 16:59, Juliusz Chroboczek j...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr wrote: ISIS is many network topologies including mesh? There are mesh extensions for ISIS? Interesting, could I please have a pointer to that work?

Re: [homenet] Despair

On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 12:07 PM, Ray Bellis r...@bellis.me.uk wrote: Please, let's draw a line under this whole argument for now. The Design Team has been tasked with drawing up a brief requirements document as soon as possible and we will then try to get WG consensus on that. We need

Re: [homenet] Despair

On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Ray Bellis r...@bellis.me.uk wrote: On 05/08/2015 12:44, Dave Taht wrote: I would like to require the design team *to actually install the software*. Dave, We've heard you before, but with the best will in the world we cannot *require* IETF volunteers

Re: [homenet] Despair

, and gather data. On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 6:58 PM, Michael Richardson mcr+i...@sandelman.ca wrote: Dave Taht dave.t...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 12:07 PM, Ray Bellis r...@bellis.me.uk wrote: Please, let's draw a line under this whole argument for now. The Design

Re: [homenet] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-homenet-dncp-05.txt

a bit offtopic, it would be good to have IANA assign some port numbers soon, if they have not already. (?) ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet

Re: [homenet] Moving forward.

I would like to *require* of the design team that they actually install the available software on at least three routers and try it. I would certainly like to require of the working group the same, but despite 2 years of trying, have lost hope. ___

[homenet] A poll, redux

Back in February I had distributed a basic poll about what sorts of technologies were common in the home, and got back about 25 results from ietfers. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/homenet/current/msg04724.html Lest the complexity of those networks be written off as a geekisms, I also ran

[homenet] for those new around here

mark townsley's presentation at uknof was probably the best (somewhat) brief explanation of why the homenet working group exists, and the problems it is trying to solve. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wQdfWUsG4uI -- Dave Täht worldwide bufferbloat report:

Re: [homenet] I-D Action: draft-ietf-homenet-hncp-07.txt

On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 12:57 PM, Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, Stateless assignment based on Modified EUI64 interface identifiers [RFC4291] SHOULD be used for address assignment whenever possible, This is new and problematic. EUI64 is pretty much deprecated

Re: [homenet] I-D Action: draft-ietf-homenet-hncp-07.txt

On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 1:52 PM, Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com wrote: On 06/07/2015 08:33, Dave Taht wrote: On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 12:57 PM, Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, Stateless assignment based on Modified EUI64 interface identifiers

Re: [homenet] draft-ietf-homenet-hncp-06 now in WGLC

My request was more dogfooding. a *lot* more dogfooding. On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 8:16 AM, Markus Stenberg markus.stenb...@iki.fi wrote: On 30.6.2015 15.41, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: On Tue, 23 Jun 2015, Ray Bellis wrote: If I understand correctly, work is now ongoing to create a separate

Re: [homenet] I-D Action: draft-ietf-homenet-hncp-06.txt

On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 2:40 AM, Markus Stenberg markus.stenb...@iki.fi wrote: On 26.6.2015 18.41, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: Even implementation isn't limited to it. And sorry if I sound like a broken record, but I would like the ability to set up a router-router link with less than a full

Re: [homenet] I-D Action: draft-ietf-homenet-hncp-06.txt

On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 8:41 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek j...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr wrote: Markus, I still don't understand the intent of the ad hoc interface type. If the ad-hoc interface is designed for non-transitive links, then the draft should say so (in which case I'll be glad to

Re: [homenet] ISIS upcoming development and demo

What I have never figured out was how to get something in bits bytes. I am hauling a boatload of gear from various manufacturers, might as well set it up. Is there going to be dogfooding? On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 3:09 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek j...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr wrote: We’d like to

Re: [homenet] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-homenet-dncp-03

(3) it is impossible to act as a dumb DNCP forwarder without publishing a Node-State TLV and a full set of Neighbor sub-TLVs. This is not true. Given basic bridging of ‘remember one guy on end of each link’, you can do essentially bridging. so my use case (wanting routers without any ipv6

Re: [homenet] How is prefix delegation handled on OpenWRT/CeroWRT in a homenet configuration?

I note that I was unsuccessful in getting PD to work properly on ubuntu. dhclient would assign /68s, dibbler (as currently released) would crash, and dibbler rc2 also had issues, all this compounded by switching between these daemons - causing the dhcp server on the cable modem I was using - to

Re: [homenet] Homenet Design Team for Routing Protocol Selection

On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 6:33 AM, Alia Atlas akat...@gmail.com wrote: Terry's email on April 6 confirmed that Homenet will use the approach of having a Design Team to select the one mandatory-to-implement routing protocol. The charter for the design team, as sent in his email, is below. I am

Re: [homenet] Selecting a routing protocol for HOMENET

On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 6:56 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek j...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr wrote: Sorry for the delay, I needed to think this over. In the light of the above figures -- can I trust an IETF working group to understand that a huge amount of effort has been put into removing mechanisms

Re: [homenet] Selecting a routing protocol for HOMENET

On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 8:21 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek j...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr wrote: a plan of the form produce base spec RCC and only then start to think about security will get pushback from me. Why? (If the answer is read BCP 61, I'll do that, but not right now.) Partly that and

Re: [homenet] Selecting a routing protocol for HOMENET

I don't see any point in starting up a new working group[1] whatsoever based on the events of the last ietf homenet meeting, particularly with the arrival of a new written from-spec version of babel in under 15 hours, (which I am still chortling about. I am tempted to write one in rust). It is

Re: [homenet] IEEE 1905.1 and 1905.1a

up until this moment I had never heard of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_1905 this spec, and it does sound useful. +10 on more open access to it. +100 on anyone working on open source code for it. I would certainly like closer relationships between the IEEE and IETF one day, perhaps even a

Re: [homenet] [Babel-users] T.M.S. proudly presents - Babel: the 2nd implementation

I note that the only difference in quagga babeld vs babeld behavior (aside from https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7298 ) that I could detect at the last time I did major interoperability testing (I still have quagga babel up at various points of my network however and can look harder in the source

Re: [homenet] T.M.S. proudly presents - Babel: the 2nd implementation

On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 1:16 PM, Juliusz Chroboczek j...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr wrote: I would like to know what happens if Dave Taht installs your Babel implementation on half of his base stations and keeps Juliusz' on the other half. Markus' implementation doesn't currently do any

Re: [homenet] T.M.S. proudly presents - Babel: the 2nd implementation

On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 12:11 PM, Lorenzo Colitti lore...@google.com wrote: On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 2:00 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson swm...@swm.pp.se wrote: Just to be pedantic, my comment was completely serious and not a hint. New implementations almost always suffer from lack of testing of

Re: [homenet] renumbering issues, etc, in homenet

On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 2:31 PM, Lorenzo Colitti lore...@google.com wrote: On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 4:02 PM, Dave Taht dave.t...@gmail.com wrote: My basic request was basically that everyone on homenet dogfood what exists (hnetd, babel) to see all the real problems renumbering induces

[homenet] actual requirements for standardization of an ietf protocol?

I saw this message go by today: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/homenet/current/msg05073.html where the author stated: If there were a solid specification and second implementation of babel, babel would win on the basis of functionality. A) As for the first, babel is pretty fully

[homenet] renumbering issues, etc, in homenet

Dear Brian: I have unsubscribed from the homenet mailing list. In fact, all ietf mailing lists. I realize, like multiple spy agencies, and the mafia, that the only way to truly leave the ietf is feet first, but for the next 6 months. I would rather get some coding done, because in my world, it is

Re: [homenet] L2 link status [was: More about marginal links]

On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 11:27 PM, Teco Boot t...@inf-net.nl wrote: Op 3 mrt. 2015, om 21:50 heeft Curtis Villamizar cur...@ipv6.occnc.com het volgende geschreven: In message CAGnRvuq+kq+djqPvKHDXBdDkbfjt=gnj0owqvc241vllwxb...@mail.gmail.com Henning Rogge writes: On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at

Re: [homenet] a modest plugfest proposal

On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 12:02 AM, Gert Doering g...@space.net wrote: Hi, On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 05:14:47PM -0800, Dave Taht wrote: That sort of plugfest would get the known users of things like hnetd up from 2 to at least 50, and I would hope that the increased operational experience from

Re: [homenet] draft-mrw-homenet-rtg-comparison-01

On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 4:15 PM, Curtis Villamizar cur...@ipv6.occnc.com wrote: In message 7i1tl7jdjs.wl-...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr Juliusz Chroboczek writes: Dear Curtis, I've just read through your mail carefully. While you make some good points, I think that, unless a champion

Re: [homenet] [Battlemesh] Battlemesh V8 Logo

On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 9:09 AM, Musti mu...@wlan-si.net wrote: Hi folks, I am happy to present the new logo for Battlemesh V8 in Maribor, designed by Barbara :) http://battlemesh.org/BattleMeshV8/PosterDesign Comments appreciated! That is a truly awesome poster! I hope you line up more

Re: [homenet] Routing protocol comparison document

I am glad, incidentally, that for the first time, this wg is considering some of the problems wifi has, and growing towards understanding them in more detail. I have long been working on finding answers to these deep, underlying problems - after first identifying some the major ones:

Re: [homenet] L2 link status [was: More about marginal links]

On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 12:36 PM, Curtis Villamizar cur...@ipv6.occnc.com wrote: In message 87a903ef2j.wl-...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr Juliusz Chroboczek writes: Thought: In general, my feeling is that L2 link status is widely relied upon in commercial product/dpeloyments. If homenet

Re: [homenet] L2 link status [was: More about marginal links]

On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 1:37 PM, Curtis Villamizar cur...@ipv6.occnc.com wrote: In message cagnrvupwf3n9jqmi_txwbxketo_59zdqqapcfcsyfduvqp8...@mail.gmail.com Henning Rogge writes: On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 9:36 PM, Curtis Villamizar cur...@ipv6.occnc.com wrote: In message

Re: [homenet] L2 link status [was: More about marginal links]

One of the things I am testing is the new (so far pretty wonderful) minstrel-blues patches for linux which couples rate control with reducing power where it can, and adds a per station rc_stats_csv file that can be easily parsed by external utilities. This gives you a snapshot of the actual rate

[homenet] a modest plugfest proposal

I hereby request of the chairs of this working group that they cancel any planned presentations at the upcoming meeting, and instead require of the group that they actually bring in their own router from anything off this list: http://downloads.openwrt.org/snapshots/trunk/ and there be, say, 5

Re: [homenet] Routing protocol comparison document

On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 2:00 PM, Curtis Villamizar cur...@ipv6.occnc.com wrote: In message 54ee258e.8060...@gmail.com Brian E Carpenter writes: On 26/02/2015 05:14, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: On Wed, 25 Feb 2015, Ray Hunter wrote: That way the devices can roam at L3, without all of the

Re: [homenet] HNCPD usability issues

A sample, correct, homenet enabled openwrt network file would be good to show somewhere. I remain a bit confused about interfaces (which are a hint to the firewall) and ifnames. It sounds like deleting the lan/wan entries entirely is what you want? And how do you retain static ipv4 assignment but

Re: [homenet] HNCPD usability issues

On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 1:19 AM, Steven Barth cy...@openwrt.org wrote: A sample, correct, homenet enabled openwrt network file would be good to show somewhere. I remain a bit confused about interfaces (which are a hint to the firewall) and ifnames. It sounds like deleting the lan/wan entries

[homenet] HNCPD usability issues

retitling this because I really, really, really, would like more people using hncpd and providing feedback on that, rather than arguing over specification documents. On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Markus Stenberg markus.stenb...@iki.fi wrote: On 20.2.2015, at 22.01, Dave Taht dave.t

[homenet] A poll

The homenet working group has been laboring for several years now to find ways to make ipv6 more deployable to home (and presumably small business) users. In addition to multiple specification documents some code has been produced to try and make things easier. At least in the USA, comcast has

Re: [homenet] Routing protocol comparison document

On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 10:10 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson swm...@swm.pp.se wrote: On Fri, 20 Feb 2015, Toerless Eckert wrote: So foremost, it would be good to understand if there really is home L2 equipment that MUST see MLD to operate correctly. Otherwise i'd happily ignore the problem and say

Re: [homenet] Routing protocol comparison document

On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Steven Barth cy...@openwrt.org wrote: Am 19. Februar 2015 20:05:56 MEZ, schrieb Ted Lemon mel...@fugue.com: Hm, I will have to try it out. Is it in a distribution? ohybridproxy in openwrt. It's mainly useful with hnetd (hncp) though. Manual configuration

Re: [homenet] Routing protocol comparison document

On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 12:52 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson swm...@swm.pp.se wrote: On Thu, 19 Feb 2015, Gert Doering wrote: We're not talking about a routing protocol for every possible use case here - we're talking about a fairly well defined environment (aka fairly small number of devices, IPv4

Re: [homenet] Routing protocol comparison document

On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Ted Lemon mel...@fugue.com wrote: On Feb 19, 2015, at 2:11 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson swm...@swm.pp.se wrote: I'd imagine it's easier to do AQM on routed ports instead of switched ports as well, that's where I can imagine CeroWRT choosing this approach. I don't

Re: [homenet] Routing protocol comparison document

On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 12:14 PM, Dave Taht dave.t...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Ted Lemon mel...@fugue.com wrote: On Feb 19, 2015, at 2:11 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson swm...@swm.pp.se wrote: I'd imagine it's easier to do AQM on routed ports instead of switched ports

Re: [homenet] More about marginal links [was: Routing protocol comparison document]

On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek j...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr wrote: A marginal link is simply one that has a measurable amount of packet loss. Ok, re-reading this exchange, it looks like I may have wrongly assumed that people are aware of background. I'll need to put

Re: [homenet] Routing protocol comparison document

On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 3:45 PM, Sander Steffann san...@steffann.nl wrote: Hi Ted, Op 19 feb. 2015, om 19:49 heeft Ted Lemon mel...@fugue.com het volgende geschreven: I don't know. Homenet multicast is an open issue. But I don't think this use case represents a serious problem,

Re: [homenet] Routing protocol comparison document

I wanted to note that I embrace and endorse Juliusz´s and Markus´s comments on this thread, and most of the rest of the discussion seems pretty sensible. Some random comments: * I miss the days when rip was ubiquitous. When you needed a routing protocol, you generally *really* needed one, and

Re: [homenet] udp-lite support?

On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 8:20 AM, Mark Townsley m...@townsley.net wrote: On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 9:07 PM, Dave Taht dave.t...@gmail.com wrote: I am growing concerned by the widespread adoption of udp as a baseline transport for so many protocols (webrtc, bittorrent maelstrom, etc.) Certainly

Re: [homenet] sorting out the right ipv6 addr to choose and name in a source specific world

On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 5:50 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek j...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr wrote: Probe results should probably [be] interpreted per-prefix not per-address. Hmm. Interesting idea. +1. Pick one of dhcp, slaac, or privacy within a prefix with the best lifetime, maybe? I can imagine

Re: [homenet] sorting out the right ipv6 addr to choose and name in a source specific world

On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 2:06 PM, Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com wrote: On 19/12/2014 04:07, Michael Richardson wrote: I am way behind on my mail (this thread) and will be away for the holidays. Merry Christmas, everyone, and to all a happy new year! Dave, my take is that

[homenet] udp-lite support?

I am growing concerned by the widespread adoption of udp as a baseline transport for so many protocols (webrtc, bittorrent maelstrom, etc.) Certainly a couple traceroutes alone could blow up my udp nat table on a busy router with open udp ports as can something as simple as trying to do reverse

Re: [homenet] sorting out the right ipv6 addr to choose and name in a source specific world

On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek j...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr wrote: You might also need to combine the features of the gateway with the metric(s) of the path to the gateway. I do end-to-end measurements in my mosh implementation, so we should not have the problem.

Re: [homenet] sorting out the right ipv6 addr to choose and name in a source specific world

On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 7:38 PM, Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com wrote: On 19/12/2014 14:49, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: Boutier's version of mosh builds connections across all source/destination pairs, and picks the one with lowest RTT. Sounds interesting. In the ideal world,

[homenet] sorting out the right ipv6 addr to choose and name in a source specific world

I have been wrestling with prefix coloring, where choosing a best prefix would be of use in (for example) reducing the problems induced by happy eyeballs when more than one ipv6 prefix is present and several other scenarios. There are many parts to this - one is in addressing, the other in DNS,

[homenet] an early attempt at getting homenet stuff to work outside the lab

I plan to spend my thanksgiving getting source sensitive routing, hnetd, and dns to play better together. I think I should switch to blogging rather than g+, but my first attempt and some of the problems encountered so far are documented here:

Re: [homenet] Stub-only implementation of Babel

On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 1:53 PM, Juliusz Chroboczek j...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr wrote: sbabeld doesn't speak to the kernel itself, it execs the ip utility instead. That makes error handling somewhat random, Steven has fixed that -- sbabeld's error handling should be reasonably reliable

Re: [homenet] Next Steps for Routing Protocol

does, and I like HNCP itself better than I like the idea of rolling something proprietary. Does that help explain matters? On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 8:46 AM, Dave Taht dave.t...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 7:55 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek j...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr wrote

[homenet] while we are distracted by IoT

Anybody know anything about Allseen? http://linuxgizmos.com/open-iot-alliance-to-tackle-smart-connected-leds/ and for that matter, AllJoyn? https://developer.qualcomm.com/mobile-development/create-connected-experiences/intelligent-proximal-connectivity-alljoyn -- Dave Täht

Re: [homenet] Next Steps for Routing Protocol

On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 7:33 AM, Acee Lindem (acee) a...@cisco.com wrote: Hi Juliusz, I think I understand. If there is the potential for a loop (advertised distance = babel router’s former distance), babel will wait for the next sequenced route from the source. So, the loop-free guarantee

Re: [homenet] Next Steps for Routing Protocol

On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 4:12 PM, Juliusz Chroboczek j...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr wrote: I do note that the default 4 sec update interval bugs me. It's probably the Hello interval that's biting you, not the Update interval. Sure. crank up the update interval by a factor of, say, 1, to

Re: [homenet] Next Steps for Routing Protocol

On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 7:06 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek j...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr wrote: This is no different to how most routing protocols work. Something of an aside to this conversation, but there is a similar problem in dealing with an external gateway that does not speak the routing

Re: [homenet] Next Steps for Routing Protocol

On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 9:20 AM, Henning Rogge hro...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 5:38 PM, Juliusz Chroboczek j...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr wrote: If I understand Dave right, the idea is to switch things around: instead of having the Nest node speak a stub version of a Homenet

Re: [homenet] Stub-only implementation of Babel

On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 10:12 AM, Steven Barth cy...@openwrt.org wrote: On 17.11.2014 19:09, Dave Taht wrote: Statically linked on x86_64 it is 853k. :) 40KB with musl (CC=musl-gcc -static -Os -s). I am not, repeat, not going to pull down the devkit for http://www.tinyos.net/ And looking

Re: [homenet] Stub-only Babel [was: Next Steps for Routing Protocol]

On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 6:02 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek j...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr wrote: Is there interest in a stub-only implementation of Babel? Should it be a standalone daemon, or should it be integrated in the HNCP daemon? I think the most interesting thing would be reference code which

Re: [homenet] Next Steps for Routing Protocol

On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 7:55 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek j...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr wrote: This included technical discussion around a partially unanticipated I have always felt that we needed to have something that could route packets as best as possible based on conditions (and in particular

[homenet] homekit?

Does anyone know anything about homekit is supposed to interoperate? https://developer.apple.com/homekit/ -- Dave Täht ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet

Re: [homenet] Next Steps for HNCP

I think this conversation has got off on the wrong foot - the start of it was about routing protocol choice, and the other was how to interoperate with a stubby nest network in hncp. On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 8:43 PM, Michael Richardson mcr+i...@sandelman.ca wrote: Mark Townsley m...@townsley.net

Re: [homenet] draft-cheshire-homenet-dot-home-01

On Nov 13, 2014 2:58 AM, Michael Richardson mcr+i...@sandelman.ca wrote: STARK, BARBARA H bs7...@att.com wrote: Why can't we make a similar assumption that a homenet can get a dns delegation from some upstream provider as well, be it an ISP, or some other DNS serving entity?

Re: [homenet] Let's make in-home ULA presence a MUST !?

a data point: openwrt barrier breaker just shipped with ula generation enabled. Another data point - I just deployed ipv6 source specific routing in production. A box with an ipv6 address 5 hops deep in the network was able to get out (through 4 routers without any ipv6 addresses, just the fe80)

Re: [homenet] Let's make in-home ULA presence a MUST !?

On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 2:40 PM, James Woodyatt j...@nestlabs.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Ted Lemon mel...@fugue.com wrote: When we talked about this previously, I think the idea was that when two networks with two sets of ULA prefixes merge, you deprecate one of them. [...]

Re: [homenet] [Anima] Ted Lemon's Block on charter-ietf-anima-00-09: (with BLOCK)

On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 6:50 AM, Leddy, John john_le...@cable.comcast.com wrote: My worry on this topic is that we are referring to ³the Home² and ³the Enterprise². I have always approached homenet as a place to get standards that also work for small business. Small business is the place (IMHO)

[homenet] my mic comment on routing protocol interop...

What I'd meant at the microphone concerning interoperability, was not at the protocol level, but at the daemon level. We have separate forks of quagga (for ISIS with source sensitive routing), bird (for ospfv3), stand alone daemons like babels (which also has a quagga-babel version, but I think

Re: [homenet] HNCP: Few proposed changes for next draft version

On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Steven Barth cy...@openwrt.org wrote: Hello everyone, I prepared the first few changes for the upcoming HNCP draft version 01. Most of this is derived from features we already added to our reference implementation. I confess to being more interested in a

Re: [homenet] [dnssd] IETF-89 WG meeting minutes

On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 8:08 AM, Douglas Otis doug.mtv...@gmail.com wrote: On Apr 4, 2014, at 6:10 AM, Don Sturek d.stu...@att.net wrote: Hi Douglas, As one who follows the WG and having a keen interest in homenet solutions, I fail to see how TRILL addresses the homenet problem set.

  1   2   >