On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 17:43, Mark Townsley <towns...@cisco.com> wrote:
> Before we decide that we must have an IGP, that it must be > cryptographically secured, and that we have to tackle key distribution for > it, I'd like to take a step or two back from the routing protocol part of > the equation. > I'm not saying we need to secure the IGP. I'm saying that we need homenet devices to know if they're "part of the same homenet" or not. This is important for border detection, among other things. One easy way to do this, if you have an IGP anyway, is to say that all the devices that are part of the same IGP domain, (and thus share the same key), are on the same homenet. It might - just - be possible for users to understand that to "join the network" you need "the password for the network". Then all you need to do is find a way to share a key. This simple solution falls over if a device needs to be part of two homenets at the same time, or if you want to merge two homenets. Is that clearer now?
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
