[homenet] I-D Action: draft-ietf-homenet-hncp-09.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Home Networking Working Group of the IETF. Title : Home Networking Control Protocol Authors : Markus Stenberg Steven Barth

Re: [homenet] I-D Action: draft-ietf-homenet-hncp-09.txt

Hi everyone, this is HNCP revision 9. This version addresses the issues raised in the second WGLC. Changes include final adaptions to the latest DNCP version (updated TLV definitions, improved version handling), as well as clarifications to client configuration and naming. Cheers, Steven

Re: [homenet] Reachability of distributed prefixes

On 01/09/2015 01:24, Gert Doering wrote: > Hi, > > On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 10:03:47PM -0700, joel jaeggli wrote: And that's a well-known issue that the IETF needs to finally tackle: source-address failover. >> >> So long as you don't invoke the prospect of either extremely expnesive >>

Re: [homenet] Host naming in Homenet

On 31.8.2015, at 14.33, Markus Stenberg wrote: > Sure, you can define link segment name election mechanism and use per-link > names (they are even mentioned as an option in > draft-ietf-homenet-stenberg-hybrid-proxy-zeroconf; see also why doing that > zeroconf might be

Re: [homenet] Host naming in Homenet

On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 12:34 PM, Markus Stenberg wrote: > On 31.8.2015, at 13.16, Henning Rogge wrote: >> Typical configuration of a cheap router would be to run dnsmasq for >> local DHCP and as a DNS cache. If each of these DNS caches could >> forward

Re: [homenet] Host naming in Homenet

On 31.8.2015, at 14.12, Tore Anderson wrote: > Jumping in here with the perpective of a «dumb user» who spent the > weekend playing with the Homenet implementation in OpenWrt 15.05... > > (Note that I don't know whether my comments pertain to the Homenet > standards themselves or

Re: [homenet] Host naming in Homenet

* Markus Stenberg > Instead, it sounds like potentially issue with IPv4 + dnsmasq (e.g. > option that prevents RFC1918 replies from being forwarded), I hope > you are not using legacy IP :) I left everything at defaults, so my links were indeed numbered using IPv4

Re: [homenet] Host naming in Homenet

On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 12:44 PM, Markus Stenberg wrote: > Let’s assume a shared link with 2 homenet routers (rid1, rid2) and 1 host > (foo). > > Given no election, use of e.g. mDNS to determine hosts/services would result > in the host showing under both rid1.home and

Re: [homenet] Host naming in Homenet

Erik Kline wrote: On 26 August 2015 at 15:41, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: Can we just go with whichever recommendations come out of dnssd? https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/dnssd/charter/ https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/dnssd/documents/ Could you

Re: [homenet] Host naming in Homenet

In general I think making unqualified names work is problematic. We'd need to add one search path entry per link which doesn't scale. Plus duplicates are not really handled deterministically. Cheers, Steven___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org

Re: [homenet] Reachability of distributed prefixes

Hi, On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 10:03:47PM -0700, joel jaeggli wrote: > >> And that's a well-known issue that the IETF needs to finally tackle: > >> source-address failover. > > So long as you don't invoke the prospect of either extremely expnesive > overlay networks, or globably route scalability

Re: [homenet] Host naming in Homenet

On 31.8.2015, at 14.42, Ray Hunter (v6ops) wrote: > Also DND SD (RFC 6763) states "Address-based Domain Enumeration queries are > performed using names under the IPv6 reverse-mapping tree" which is under the > direct control of the individual upstream ISPs. > > So, what are

Re: [homenet] Reachability of distributed prefixes

Hi, On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 01:16:28PM +1200, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > > And that's a well-known issue that the IETF needs to finally tackle: > > source-address failover. > > We did - it's called shim6. The trouble is that we can't deploy it > because of stupid firewalls blocking the