Hi homenet,
If you haven't volunteered for NomCom, please consider doing so by this coming
*Wednesday*. It's really helpful to have people on NomCom from various Areas
and WGs (NomCom tends to be dominated by people who participate in Routing).
Robert Sparks has done a great job of making it
Hi homenet WG,
Stephen and I have been chatting about the status of the 2 naming drafts
(draft-ietf-homenet-front-end-naming-delegation and
draft-ietf-homenet-naming-architecture-dhc-options).
We started a 3-week WGLC about a month ago (04 May). Both drafts received
comprehensive review from
I'm hoping not to start divisive discussion, but think it's better to discuss
inside the WG rather than wait until IETF LC.
Might the authors consider whether a word other than "Master" could be used in
the terms Distribution Master, Reverse Distribution Master,
Distribution/Distributed Master
Hi homenet, intarea, dhc, and dprive,
Homenet has started WGLC for draft-ietf-homenet-front-end-naming-delegation-14
and draft-ietf-homenet-naming-architecture-dhc-options-12.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-homenet-front-end-naming-delegation/
(Simple Provisioning of Public Names
Hi Homenet,
I just wanted to make sure everyone still remembered that we have a homenet
call tomorrow.
2021-04-23 14:00 - 15:30 UTC
Meeting location (Webex):
https://ietf.webex.com/ietf/j.php?MTID=m13cc475caad6a1a123d249c4bef63693
The meeting datatracker page that has links to agenda, codimd,
Hi homenet,
Last Friday, I set up the interim call for Friday April 23 (2 weeks from now)
to discuss the following 2 drafts:
Simple Provisioning of Public Names for Residential Networks
- draft-ietf-homenet-front-end-naming-delegation-13 (
-
Hi homenet,
Based on the Doodle poll, the interim will be scheduled for Friday, April 23
14:00-15:30 UTC.
I'll set up things to get it properly scheduled in datatracker and WebEx.
Barbara
___
homenet mailing list
homenet@ietf.org
Hi homenet,
I've put together a poll to (try to) figure out a date/time for an interim.
https://doodle.com/poll/pini9k5kpnwypsup?utm_source=poll_medium=link
We'll try to get the date/time picked and call set up by end of this week.
So remember: Vote early and often.
Thx,
Barbara
Hi dnssd and homenet,
The minutes Stuart took were excellent. I've posted. If anyone has comments on
them, well, please comment.
Thx,
Barbara
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/110/materials/minutes-110-homenet-00
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/110/materials/minutes-110-dnssd-00
The homenet part of the joint session will be beginning in 5 minutes at 45
minutes past the hour.
Barbara
___
homenet mailing list
homenet@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
Just addressing the administrivia point ...
> Ted posted draft-lemon-stub-networks-ps awhile ago, and I have attempted to
> collaborate with him on it. There was a goof in the XML, so when he posted
> -01 of the document, it was named draft-lemon-stub-networks, and overwrote
> his previously
Hi homenet,
draft-ietf-homenet-front-end-naming-delegation-12 and
draft-ietf-homenet-naming-architecture-dhc-options-08 were posted towards the
end of last year. There was some discussion on the list. We'll put them on the
agenda; but we also want to discuss how best to progress them --
Hi homenet and dnssd,
We (ok, Éric) realized that the joint homenet/dnssd session was at the same
time as the 2nd add session (Thursday Session I). And this made us very
unhappy. So we moved it. The homenet+dnssd meeting is now Friday Session I.
Barbara
OK. Sounds good. Thx,
Barbara
From: Ted Lemon
Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2021 5:21 PM
To: STARK, BARBARA H
Cc: homenet@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [homenet] IETF 110 and homenet
On Jan 19, 2021, at 4:14 PM, STARK, BARBARA H
mailto:bs7...@att.com>> wrote:
Since there were some WG draft u
Hi homenet,
Since there were some WG draft updates published at the end of last year, we've
decided to have a joint session with dnssd WG during IETF 110 so we can try to
get some feedback on the drafts but also discuss how best to progress them and
ensure they get the review they need/deserve.
> > My apologies, you are correct. I’ve now seen RFC 1034 which details the
> terminator.
>
> Grand so. I'll ask Eric V. to hit the reject button on this
> when he gets back to work after the holidays.
Agreed. Thx, all. Happy New (Gregorian) Year.
Barbara
> From: Michael Richardson
> STARK, BARBARA H wrote:
> >> From: Michael Richardson
> >>
> >> In the ADD WG, Barbara STARK, BARBARA H wrote:
> >> > [BHS] While my ISP requires me to use the CE router they supply, I’ve
> &
> -Original Message-
> From: Michael Richardson
>
> In the ADD WG, Barbara STARK, BARBARA H wrote:
> > [BHS] While my ISP requires me to use the CE router they supply, I’ve
> > never had an issue connecting that to my own router and then running
> m
Hi homenet,
While Michael and Daniel put some effort into their draft prior to IETF 107,
there's been no subsequent discussion of it on the list. And no new activity on
the draft.
In the absence of activity, Stephen and I don't think homenet should request
time during IETF 108.
It may be time
Most of you have seen this already. But in the off-chance you haven't (or that
you just need one more reminder to make you actually do it), here it is, again.
Barbara
This is a reminder that we need the IETF community to help us plan for the
possibility that one or more
Hi homenet,
I wanted to remind everyone we have an interim scheduled for Monday, April 20,
14:30-16:00 UTC. That's 07:30 PDT for anyone on the North American West Coast.
On a Monday. Which is real easy to forget about and sleep through. So, please,
don't forget.
Barbara
Logistics:
==
Hi Homenet,
Our assigned virtual interim day is April 20. We do have some agenda items:
Outsourcing Home Network Authoritative Naming Service
(draft-ietf-homenet-front-end-naming-delegation-10), Michael Richardson and
Daniel Migault
Draft was updated 9 March (and there was a lot of activity on
The joint dnssd+homenet session is currently scheduled for Thursday morning,
10:00-12:00 PDT.
It is scheduled against cbor, gaia, icnrg, bmwg, spring, taps, and privacypass
(BOF; looking at a new protocol).
I've seen a flurry of activity in GitHub from Michael and Daniel on the
Outsourcing
Yes, that's plural: sessions.
We went ahead and requested the Monday 18:10-19:10 time slot for dnssd privacy
topics.
Because we now have this other hour, we will delay the start of the first
session until 14:30.
There are still unhappy people, I know. But hopefully this is workable.
Comments
A draft agenda for the joint homenet/dnssd session is posted now. To save you
the trouble of unnecessary clicking here is what it says:
Administrivia and Status Update: Homenet Chair slides (5 minutes)
Homenet Naming architecture update (including hacking): Michael Richardson /
Daniel Migault
Hi dnssd and homenet,
In case you haven't looked at the draft agenda, homenet and dnssd WGs are
scheduled for a joint session, 13:30-15:30, Monday Afternoon session I. Other
WGs scheduled for that same time slot are:
calext Calendaring Extensions
extra Email mailstore and eXtensions To Revise
Removing unnecessary participants from the discussion (I don't think its
relevant to the IESG review of babel-applicability?), and adding homenet...
> > How does the HOMENET usage of babel fit into this? I would be
> > surprised if they were expecting secure link layers to be used inside
> >
> From: Michael Richardson
>
> On 2019-07-23 10:09 a.m., STARK, BARBARA H wrote:
> > - terminology (homenet)
> > - front-end naming
> > - SRP in homenet (assumes dnssd SRP draft)
> > - HNCP for external domain
> > - service discovery in hom
FYI. Coller is on the 3rd floor in the hallway on the “other” side of the
elevators.
Barbara
> On Jul 22, 2019, at 11:57 PM, STARK, BARBARA H wrote:
>
> *** Security Advisory: This Message Originated Outside of AT ***.
> Reference http://cso.att.com/EmailSecurity/IDSP.h
> I reserved the Coller room for Tuesday morning (08:30 - 10:00). It says it
> holds up to 16 people. There are bigger rooms available (and additional
> times, but I figured you meant before the first session since there's an
> anima meeting Tuesday first session), but I thought this size might
see about reflashing my router to the most current OpenWRT. It really
needs updating, anyway.
Barbara
From: Ted Lemon
Sent: Monday, July 15, 2019 3:55 PM
To: STARK, BARBARA H
Cc: Michael Richardson ; homenet
Subject: Re: [homenet] final planning for not formally meeting
On Jul 15, 2019, at 3:42
> > - I haven't scheduled
> > an unstructured meeting. Should I? Should I do a quick Doodle poll for
> > when? Or would people prefer to wing it when we get there? If we
> > schedule something, I could set up a WebEx for remote people.
>
> I had suggested that it should be a
Hi homenet,
Now that we're less than a week out...
- What planning should people do who can/will attend the hackathon? I intend to
come, and can bring a (LEDE load, currently) wireless router and other items
(Raspberry Pi ?). If that would be useful. Does anyone else want to share their
plans
Hi homenet,
Stephen and I have decided not to have a formal homenet session in Montreal.
We encourage people wanting to work on homenet code to self-organize for the
hackathon. I'll be happy to bring some OpenWRT devices to test with (and do
some testing), if that would be useful. Let me know
Hi homenet,
In Prague, we had discussions about code, meetings, hackathon, and rechartering.
One thing said about code was that if we saw no activity on the list about
people discussing code (writing and testing), that the chairs should "beat
people up".
Consider yourselves beaten up ...
Where
> > prplMesh solves the wifi broadcast domain issue.
> >
>
> >From their website: « prplMesh is an open-source, carrier-grade and
> certifiable implementation of the WiFi Alliance’s Multi-AP specification. »
>
> That's a purely layer 2 solution that relies on a central controller.
> It
Oh, and thank you to Evan Hunt and Brian Haberman for taking notes in Etherpad,
and to Mikael Abrahamsson for doing jabber. I thought the notes were
outstanding.
Barbara
> From: STARK, BARBARA H
>
> I've uploaded a draft of the IETF 104 meeting minutes. Please let us chairs
> know
I've uploaded a draft of the IETF 104 meeting minutes. Please let us chairs
know if you have comments.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/104/materials/minutes-104-homenet-00
Barbara
___
homenet mailing list
homenet@ietf.org
Does anyone have requests for homenet agenda time?
Barbara
___
homenet mailing list
homenet@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
... if your ISP-provided public IP address ever goes away, all of your RFC1918
addresses on the homenet also go away.
Not in any router I’ve ever had a hand in specifying or procuring! And
not true of my Netgear router, or any of my older Linksys routers. Or OpenWRT
loaded routers. My RFC1918
> For the last 10 to 15 years the ISP-provided home router has come to
> dominate the market, with the belief by the ISPs that this is a MUST that they
> control the device. Many (but not all) at the IETF do not share this view,
> but
> most non-technical users see the ISP provided router is
> > But Wi-Fi Alliance (WFA) has been working to provide a solution for
> seamless whole home coverage. And from what I can see, I think it's going to
> be successful. But WFA EasyMesh (release 1) is a tree-topology L2 bridged
> network. I do think this needs to move towards true mesh (and the
> I would guess that even after 5 years, we still don't have much
> v6 deployment into homes and that's a pretty big problem.
That's an interesting statement to make. Do you have evidence of that?
https://www.worldipv6launch.org/measurements/ shows considerable deployment. I
know for a fact
Hi homenet,
The IESG has published the preliminary IETF 104 agenda. homenet is currently
scheduled for 9:00-11:00 Tuesday Morning session I. Other sessions at that
time are jmap, uta, dmm, netmod, rtgarea, cose, teep, and quic.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/104/agenda.html
If any key
Hi homenet,
I've uploaded draft minutes.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-103-homenet/
Please let us chairs know if changes are needed.
Barbara
___
homenet mailing list
homenet@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
I've done an individual review of simple-naming-03. I'm splitting the comments
up into several emails, just in case there's anything to discuss related to
each topic. It'll take me some time to get all the emails written (in between
doing other things).
This email has all of my comments
Hi homenet,
I've posted a draft agenda at
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/agenda-103-homenet/. For convenience, it's
copied below. Please let me and Stephen know what adjustments you'd like.
Barbara
-
IETF 103 - Homenet Agenda
Bangkok,
by 24
hours. The new deadline is 23:59 UTC on October 23. Sorry for not being able to
give earlier notice about this.
Barbara
From: Ted Lemon
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2018 5:39 PM
To: STARK, BARBARA H
Cc: HOMENET
Subject: Re: [homenet] Reminder: homenet call
Okay, actually it's not before
Hi homenet,
I just wanted to remind everyone we have a call scheduled tomorrow to progress
the simple-naming draft.
Time: 11:00-12:00 EDT
Place: https://ietf.webex.com/ietf/j.php?MTID=mca447be3b15845189801f00cf05f1d21
Agenda:
Hi homenet,
Homenet is currently scheduled to meet in Bangkok November 7 at 13:50-15:20
(Wednesday Afternoon session I).
Important dates between now and then:
Document submission deadline: Monday, October 22
Interim call for simple-naming: Oct 23, 11:00-12:00 EDT (details at
Hi Homenet,
New plan for conference calls scheduled between now and Bangkok:
Canceling both Oct 2 and 16 calls. Scheduling a call for Oct 23 at 11:00-12:00
EDT.
Barbara
___
homenet mailing list
homenet@ietf.org
Hi homenet,
Several very important people have conflicts with the Oct 16 call. Therefore,
I'm cancelling it.
Please let the homenet chairs know if you would like an additional call
(11:00-12:00 ET) on Oct 30. Note that on Oct 30, Europe will have left Daylight
Saving Time (Fall back 1 hour),
Hi homenet,
We have a call Tuesday, scheduled for 11:00 - 12:30 EDT (though we've been just
doing 1 hour). We'll be continuing the review of simple-naming. You can ask Ted
Lemon for access to the most up-to-date version on Google docs. The mostly
up-to-date version is on the homenet github at
Hi homenet,
I just wanted to remind everyone of the call this coming Tuesday. Webex details
below.
Also, if you want to provide Ted with comments on the simple-naming draft,
remember to send him an email to get invited to the Google docs rendition. I
put in a few of my own comments there, and
Thanks, Ted. I’ve also put this draft version on the homenet github site (I
noted a few nit changes I had to make on the Google drafts page). I think what
we said is the authors would periodically push a new version from what’s in
Google docs onto the github page. Ted, Stuart, and Daniel should
Thx Ted, for noticing. Looks like someone was having fun with time zones.
BTW, the messed up meeting times were for September 4 and beyond. Tomorrow’s
was ok.
It’s late-ish for Stephen, now. So I’ve decided to go ahead and take care of
this stuff. Hopefully Stephen doesn’t try to also fix
> On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 17:46:35 +0100 STARK, BARBARA H
> wrote > Hi Denis, > You appear to have perceived
> events and statements different from how others' have perceived these.
> > I don't find this thread accusing Juliusz of bad behavior to be an
> appro
I’ve now finished the repository for -dhc-options, too. I saw the commits from
Tomek were very old.
I think everything looks ok at
Daniel: Thanks for doing this.
Just to add more change (no that’s not really the reason – the reason is to
formalize things with official Note Wells and integrated IETF tools and such),
we have an official homenet-wg github site
(https://github.com/ietf-homenet-wg). I’ve put the
omponents of the homenet solution cannot be used for DDoS attacks. I would
prefer for homenet solutions to be natively incapable of being used in DDoS
attacks.
Barbara
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 12:40 PM, STARK, BARBARA H <mailto:bs7...@att.com>
wrote:
> > Since homenet is supposed
> STARK, BARBARA H wrote:
> > Since homenet is supposed to be about an unmanaged
> > network, and configuration via a management protocol requires
> somebody
> > who knows what they’re doing, it doesn’t fall within my interpretation
> > of t
> > Since homenet is supposed to be about an unmanaged
> > network, and configuration via a management protocol requires somebody
> > who knows what they’re doing,
>
> Traditionally, yes, but we do actually want to get away from that.
> (It's our explicit goal to do that in ANIMA, for which
Since homenet is supposed to be about an unmanaged network,
and configuration via a management protocol requires somebody who knows what
they’re doing, it doesn’t fall within my interpretation of the charter.
Barbara
From: homenet On Behalf Of Ted Lemon
Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2018 5:57 PM
Hi homenet,
Draft minutes have been posted.
Thx to Phill Hallam-Baker for taking them.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/102/materials/minutes-102-homenet-01.html
Please let us know if you think they need changes.
Barbara and Stephen
___
homenet
> > You're concerned with the homenet losing state when the master is
> > unplugged. By having the master in the cloud, this problem is eliminated.
> I can't speak for Juliusz, but my first question was "what if i don't want it
> in the cloud"? For one thing, what if it's a cloudless day?
I
Hi homenet,
There've been some agenda changes, to let Daniel be in 2 places at once, and
make the total allocated time add up to 90 minutes. I'll see y'all this
afternoon.
Barbara
IETF 102 - Homenet Agenda
0. Administrivia (5m)
1. WG Status Update - Chairs (2 min)
2. Outsourcing Home Network
Thx Juliusz. I’m not expecting discussion on this during the meeting. Hopefully
we can resolve all issues on list.
I’ll be more proactive going forward in pushing this to completion.
Barbara
On Jul 10, 2018, at 9:08 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
>> - draft-ietf-homenet-babel-profile-06
I've updated the homenet agenda. Further updates are still possible -- just let
the chairs know. - Barbara
IETF 102 - Homenet Agenda
0. Administrivia (5m)
Blue Sheets
Note taker - TBC
Jabber relay - TBC
1. WG Status Update - Chairs (5 min)
Updated Drafts:
-
Hi Denis,
You appear to have perceived events and statements different from how others'
have perceived these.
I don't find this thread accusing Juliusz of bad behavior to be an appropriate
way of addressing your perceptions.
As chair of homenet (your email was sent to homenet and babel), I would
Hi homenet,
The recently released "subject to change" IETF agenda has homenet at
15:20-16:50 on Wednesday.
It looks like a pretty good time with not a lot of contention.
So what should we talk about?
Clearly we want homenet-simple-naming on the agenda. In fact, it probably makes
sense to give
Hi homenet,
There was great conversation about homenet-simple-naming a couple of weeks ago.
I wanted to see if I could summarize where that ended up.
Main points discussed were device (friendly? pretty?) name and/or identity
(public key?) and basic end user management (like giving devices
Congratulations to Ted, Pierre, homenet, et al for completion of another
milestone. Now if we only had a naming architecture to make good use of this
domain ...
Barbara
-Original Message-
From: rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org
A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC
Hi Alvaro,
Thanks for the comments. I agree we need to make sure the community is
comfortable with the decision. I've inserted my comments in-line.
Barbara
> I would like to DISCUSS about the Intended Status of this document -- with
> the Chairs and AD.
>
> I have to confess that I haven't been
I've posted draft minutes for the IETF 101 homenet session. Please let us know
if you have any comments.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-101-homenet/
It was great fun. We'll have to meet like that again soon.
I hope to see as many of you as possible in Montreal. In the meantime, let's
Hi homenet,
Just a quick reminder ...
Our session is scheduled for Friday morning (see details below). There will be
plenty of room for all who want to attend.
The draft agenda is posted at
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/agenda-101-homenet/
And the Internet Draft submission cut-off date is
> > Perhaps I could suggest something in the vein of "very important" or
> > "much desired feature"
>
> This is not the notion that I tried to express, probably badly. It's not
> necessarily the important feature, it's the one that will make people
> implement and deploy the protocol stack in
Hi homenetters,
As Stephen mentioned, the homenet session for IETF 101 in London is tentatively
scheduled for Friday morning, session 1, 9:30-11:30.
We haven't heard anyone complain.
I'm working on the homenet agenda, now.
Please let the chairs (homenet-cha...@ietf.org) know if you would like to
Hi homenet,
Since there has been no objection raised to changing the status of this draft
from Informational to Proposed Standard, the change has been made.
If you do have a strong objection, though, I'd like to hear it.
The reasons in favor of the change are:
- the main reference,
> From: Kennedy, Smith
> My work has recently exposed me to IEEE 1905.1. I am still learning about
> 1905.1, but I began wondering whether there was anything in the IETF that
> extended access to the 1905.1 ecosystem above the 1905.1 abstracted MAC
> layer? I found an old thread on this
> >> draft-chouasne-babel-tos-specific-00 may also cause issues, even
> >> though it is just informational. You may want to consider removing
> >> the reference so it doesn't create issues.
>
> > Ok.
>
> Does the same apply to [BABEL-Z]?
I see the Style Guide does allow you to reference work in
> > If you choose to go with a friendly name for the 6126(bis) reference,
> > consider also friendly-naming RFC 7788 to something like [HNCP] and
> > RFC
> > 7298 to [BABEL-HMAC].
>
> I've previously been chastised for the opposite (using friendly names instead
> of the RFC numbers), so I'm
Hi Juliusz,
Not as chair
I have a question about the following requirement:
REQ6: a Homenet implementation of Babel SHOULD distinguish between
wired and wireless links ; if it is unable to determine whether a link
is wired or wireless, it SHOULD make the worst-case hypothesis that
One of the most frequent comments I see for drafts post-WGLC is "why did you
choose status x for your draft?". So I'd like for the WG to consciously agree
on the status to be used for homenet-babel-profile.
Currently the draft has intended status of "Experimental".
Given the intended status of
Here is a set of comments related just to references in homenet-babel-profile.
Barbara
The first 4 references to the "Babel routing protocol" spec are to
[RFC6126bis]. All subsequent mentions are to RFC 6126. RFC 6126 is not included
as a reference in the References section. I find this
Hi homenet,
I've posted a draft agenda for homenet at IETF 100.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/agenda-100-homenet/
Please bash.
Barbara
___
homenet mailing list
homenet@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
Hi homenet,
As agreed in Prague, we're starting WGLC on draft-ietf-homenet-babel-profile,
now that it has been updated.
I've set the duration for 3 weeks so it will last through the IETF meeting.
Even though Juliusz won't be there, we can still discuss, if we want.
It might even be more fun
As chair...
I think it would be useful for homenet to discuss how to propagate its
protocols into general purpose home network routers (that people may use at the
edge or interior) and also what may or may not be good to include in
requirements specifically targeting routers at the customer's
> > Currently, there is no host that expects to use .home.arpa (or any other
> domain) inside the premises.
>
> I don't think the "or any other domain" claim is true. At the very least,
> _lots_
> of hosts are already using local. in homenets -- indeed, that's how we got to
> this pass.
Yes. I
No hat.
I'm proposing something radical here. Let the tomatoes fly.
I'd like to question whether we really need to maintain the "no changes to the
host" assumption when it comes to architecting homenet DNS.
Currently, there is no host that expects to use .home.arpa (or any other
domain) inside
> This suggests to me that the next step in HOMENET, which I think the naming
> architecture could lead, is to provide for (automatic) collection of
> statistics for
> diagnostics purposes.
> i.e. Homenet OAM.
Not as chair...
I disagree this has anything to do with the naming architecture.
I
I have moved the doc to the adopted state. Ted/Daniel, you should be able to
upload a WG revision as your next rev.
Barbara
___
homenet mailing list
homenet@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
> From: Ted Lemon
> Barbara, I seem to recall that you were enthusiastic about the work when it
> was discussed in the meeting. You're allowed to be one of the people who's
> in favor of it, despite being chair. Indeed, as > chair, you can just adopt
> it by fiat if you want. I actually
With one day left in CFA for draft-tldm-simple-homenet-naming, here is my
summary of what I think I've read.
Exactly 3 people have expressed support for adoption (Daniel [author], Michael
R, James). Hmm. That's not a lot.
Juliusz expressed opposition to adoption, but Ray and Michael said the
Thanks Daniel. And you’re not too late. The call ends this coming Friday. So if
anyone else wants to chime in, please do. I’ll try to create a summary Thursday
describing what I think I’ve heard so far. That should give everyone a brief
chance to tell me how badly I’ve misinterpreted their
> In order for a PKI solution to work, it has to be possible for any given cert
> to apply to a unique name, the ownership of which can be defended somehow.
> The CABF has spoken unequivocally on this topic:
> https://www.digicert.com/internal-names.htm
> The point of having PKI in the homenet
Hi homenet,
Thanks to all of you for your well-wishes and congratulations (and condolences)
for my new role as a homenet chair.
As my first official act, under the excellent tutelage of Ray, I'm launching a
2 week Call for Adoption on draft-tldm-simple-homenet-naming. The call will end
August
> The draft states:
> "The top-level domain name '.homenet.' is to be used for naming within
>a home network. Names ending with '.homenet.' MUST refer to
>services that are located within a home network (e.g., a printer, or
>a toaster)."
>
> Which I think is more correct and
> >I could be wrong, but I believe that Dyn was DDoSed by the Mirai
> >botnet, which propagates by exploiting devices configured with default
> credentials.
> >This has nothing to do with outdated firmwares.
>
> The problem is that you cannot realistically update those firmwares.
Many companies
> Homenet, the issue we're dealing with is that babeld performs badly when
> there is a transparent wireless bridge connected to a wired interface: the
> interface is treated as a lossless wired interface, and if it suffers packet
> loss,
> there is repeated link flapping.
I've had a lot of
> > Maybe conditionally mandatory? If the router can be used for routing
>
> That's what SHOULD is *for*
> If you are concerned it won't get implemented, then any weasel room you
> leave will be exploited. At that point, the market gets to decide.
No, SHOULD and conditionally mandatory are
1 - 100 of 142 matches
Mail list logo
