On Jan 24, 2018, at 10:39 AM, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farr...@cs.tcd.ie> wrote: > While I don't disagree with you, I do still wonder if we'd > not be better off using another term for cases where maybe > all that are involved are a couple of routers in the home, > and where there's no external party, such as google in the > example you give. > > The reason I'm on about this is that if we use terms like > "trust" and "enrollment" without qualification, then we may > end up meaning quite different things, which might then > make it harder to try find some solutions to what are in > any case all hard problems.
I think this is a valid point. We've talked about it as a trust establishment ritual; we could also call it "pairing" or "association" or "joining." However, I think that there is some value in having a "third party" in the form of a phone or computer that is in charge. This is how Google does it, and it appears to be a pretty good method. I don't know how widely successful it's been—there were a lot of unsold Google Homes on the shelf right before Christmas—but it's at least working for the early adopters.
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
