On Mar 7, 2015, at 10:44 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek
j...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr wrote:
Homenet --- A -- B
||
||
C .. D
(ZigBee)
Why would you even autoconfigure a route at all between C and D?
I think that you and Mikael expect that the ZigBee link will be
Hello everyone,
I've written up a little transitional extension to our HNCP reference
implementation. The intention is to be able to keep shipping HNCP with
e.g. OpenWrt, to be able to test HNCP independently of or together with
one or more routing protocols (e.g. for a future plugfest as
Hello everyone.
I initiated a draft on the MPvD use cases in homenet. The multihomed and
multi-subnet characteristic of homenet make PvD a good candidate for
independent and flexible domain-based network configuration. The purpose of
the document is to summarize the potential adoption use cases
Another topic comes to mind. The topic is the partitioned bridged
network.
The first situation was informally described by R. Tomlinson as
a network partitioning problem in which a particular host, H in
network N, is reachable from one gateway attached to network N but not
Brian, ever the pessimist, expects things to go wrong whenever they
can. I happen to agree with Brian.
(Which, by the way, is the reason why I think that the way networks
containing both IS-IS and Homenet IS-IS will silently break is a major
f*ck up. Section 6.3. Yeah, I was too tired to
On Mar 9, 2015, at 4:37 PM, Juliusz Chroboczek
j...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr wrote:
Brian, ever the pessimist, expects things to go wrong whenever they
can. I happen to agree with Brian.
(Which, by the way, is the reason why I think that the way networks
containing both IS-IS and
Juliusz -
If you were present at the IS-IS-WG meeting in Honolulu (if not consult the
minutes and/or read the list archives) you may remember that there was a good
deal of discussion about this problem in the context of
