Hi James,
One more issue that maybe needs some consideration:How would a router
know the boundary for dissemination of ULA prefixes? Here I am thinking of
the case where there may be more than one ISP interface and particularly in
the case of network splits and joins in the home.
So really
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.
Producing a flat L2 architecture and then trying to set up specific
service filters to contain the traffic seems like an L3 problem to me.
Claiming
Speaking as someone who thinks service discovery is absolutely essential,
could someone enlighten me as to how devices communicating machine to
machine would locate compatible devices to communicate with absent service
discovery?
I also don't disagree that section 3.7.1 needs better clarity on
Hi Mike,
I think disconnected use is a MUST and not aspirational.
I would not want my networked printer to stop working, my smart appliances
to not be able to read my meter, etc. all because my ISP decided to do
some maintenance.
Don
On 3/13/13 3:28 PM, Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com wrote:
Hi Michael,
What you wrote below regarding the need for an LCD and entries typed into
a web browser is not quite right.
Our commercial group (Smart Energy Profile 2 in the ZigBee Alliance) has
created well known service names (even some that incorporate unique device
identities) that allow for
working in such a home network?
Don
On 9/25/12 12:34 PM, Teco Boot t...@inf-net.nl wrote:
Op 25 sep. 2012, om 18:47 heeft Don Sturek het volgende geschreven:
Sorry to jump in.
Hi Robert,
One more point touched on in your note below:
1) Ideally, it would be great if a single
, will
require a forklift upgrade of a deployed network in order to work will not
be popular.
Don
On 9/24/12 11:49 AM, Curtis Villamizar cur...@occnc.com wrote:
In message cc84f8f1.1a1c4%d.stu...@att.net
Don Sturek writes:
Hi Curtis,
SLAAC not working is a major problem.
Don
Don
5060bdc7.6020...@freedesktop.org
Jim Gettys writes:
On 09/24/2012 03:17 PM, Don Sturek wrote:
Hi Curtis,
Here is the use case:
1) Customer has a legacy AP in their house
2) Customer brings home new devices supporting IPv6 (which are
designed
to communicate only with other IPv6 based devices
Hi Curtis,
SLAAC not working is a major problem.
Don
On 9/23/12 4:09 PM, Curtis Villamizar cur...@occnc.com wrote:
In message 505e83f6.3030...@joelhalpern.com
Joel M. Halpern writes:
Since you invited flames...
The argument on /64 as the longest prefix is not that it is magically
likely to go the DNS way than anything
else. In practice there's no hard and fast boundary between home and
small business.
Brian
On 10/09/2012 15:17, Don Sturek wrote:
Bonjour is based on mDNS
(http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-cheshire-dnsext-multicastdns/)
and
DNS-SD (http
Hi Michael,
Your note below strangely proves the counterpoint (ie. debutante ball
for mDNS).
In your sample of 5, I am sure most (maybe all?) have some Apple product
of sometype. If you actually had a packet sniffers in this study, you
will find these devices happily advertising and finding
Hi Brian,
The complication to what you wrote below is the current sale of internet
suffixes by ICANN. It will no longer be clear that .uniqueString would
not conflict with another suffix on the wider internet (or could in the
future).
I think, in the current environment, we will be lucky to
Hi Tim,
One more consideration:
In the home, it is possible that multiple independent subnets could be
combined, each with their own ULA prefix. This would happen in cases
where the homeowner buys multiple silo'ed solutions (like a home
automation system, Wi-Fi AP with connected MACs/Pcs, etc)
Can I ask exactly where SLP has been deployed? I spent some time
investigating discovery solutions (we ended up using mDNS) but I could not
find any significant deployments of SLP.
It really came down to uPnP and mDNS...
Don
On 3/10/12 10:58 AM, Brian E Carpenter
Hi Brian,
To be honest, I was not wedded to mDNS (or xmDNS though I am down as the
author) but frankly that or uPnP seemed to be the only game in town when
we made our selection.
I was actually told by several people to avoid SLP since it was deployed
in no real numbers anywhere and the code
As one of the silent ones in Lee's note, I agree with what he is saying.
While homenet needs to define a home routing solution, the following are
the requirements for that solution from my perspective:
1) Must be an established, existing, deployed routing protocol (or
heavily based on one). We
Hi Anders,
+1 on what you wrote. Here is another reason that ULAs are needed:
1) If globals were used on the sub nets in your example, there would be a
dependence on the ISP serving the prefix that is unwanted for
communication within the home (eg, on/off for lighting within the home).
2) For
Hi Lee,
I like this list of requirements!
One thing: if the requirements on routing to the internet using the alternate
prefix proves too complicated on a firewalled interface we should defer that
feature.
Don
Sent from T-Mobile G2 with Google
Howard, Lee lee.how...@twcable.com wrote:
+1
I was going to respond with a similar note but Lee beat me to it.
I have never heard of a WG adopting a non-existant draft soon to be
published.
Don
On 9/19/11 1:03 PM, Howard, Lee lee.how...@twcable.com wrote:
Ray and I expect Tim's first version to be published very soon, and
19 matches
Mail list logo
