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" <[email protected]> wrote: >I've caught up on some 300 messages about routing. Here are the requirements >I've gleaned. Question marks are unclear to me, please help. > > > >1. Homenet router requirements > >2. When evaluating a solution, discuss whether it provides for: > >3. Reachability between all nodes in the home network. > >a. Links may be Ethernet, WiFi, MoCA, or any other; test all solutions >against mutliple L2 types. > >4. Border detection. > >a. Border may be upstream ISP, or may be a device that is a gateway to >SmartGrid devices, e.g. a controller that speaks RPL to 802.15.4 and foo to >home net. Or there may be no border, if no external connection has been >established. > >b. Must be able to find "up" (a path to the Internet), but must not be >dependent on "up" (Internet connectivity) existing for intra-home reachability. > >c. May be discovered by routing protocol, or other means. > >5. Robust to routers being moved/added/removed/renumbered > >a. Convergence time a few minutes or less. > >6. No configuration required. > >a. We might tolerate? a single password being entered on each device. >Discuss. > >7. Best-path is a non-requirement. > >8. Support for multiple upstream networks is a requirement. > >a. Including wireless offload, video-only, and split-tunnel VPN >scenarios. > >b. With separate routers to each. Not multihomed off the same router. > >c. Prefix delegated from all ISPs (upstreams). > >d. ISP A is default. > >e. With only traffic destined to ISP B's prefix using that link. > >f. With a backup default to ISP B, if desired. What is default >condition? > >g. Source address selection is out of scope. And should be solved by >rfc3484, with longest prefix match (whether ULA or walled garden). Choosing >which address to use to look up the destination address is out of scope. > >9. Cannot assume hierarchical prefix delegation in the home (at least, >not unless the WG develops such a solution). > >10. A host with mutliple upstream paths to the same destination should be >able to use another in case on fails. > >11. Prevent looping. > >12. Prefix stability? > >13. Lightweight (cheap) implementation. > >Let me know if I've missed, or mistated, anything. > > > >Lee > > > >________________________________ >This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable >proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to >copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for >the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not >the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any >dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the >contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be >unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender >immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail >and any printout. > >_______________________________________________ >homenet mailing list >[email protected] >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
