Well, the charter certainly says that we're supposed to think about homenet's impact on manageability. Granted, that's a thin reed to hang on, and it would probably be better to make the charter more explicit. But to be clear here, all home networks have user interfaces, and this is all we are talking about. We've somewhat skirted the issue, but if we want to be able to have an enrollment process, that's going to have a user interface. If we want to be able to do things like change the SSIDs, that's going to require a user interface.
In my mind, the idea of homenet is not to be an unmanaged network, but to be a network that doesn't require management to operate. If you don't do any managing, it should still work. That doesn't mean that doing some managing is a bad thing. And if we don't specify something in this regard, I'm afraid we're going to wind up with lots of homegrown management UIs that force people to buy all their homenet routers from a single vendor.. On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 10:59 PM, STARK, BARBARA H <bs7...@att.com> wrote: > <individual hat> 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 <homenet-boun...@ietf.org> *On Behalf Of *Ted Lemon > *Sent:* Tuesday, July 24, 2018 5:57 PM > *To:* Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca> > *Cc:* homenet <homenet@ietf.org> > *Subject:* Re: [homenet] standard way of configuring homenets > > > > I don't think using HNCP in that particular way is a great plan, but I'm > willing to be convinced. I would hope that this is in charter. > > > > On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 5:48 PM, Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca> > wrote: > > > I very much like the idea of having a standard way to configure homenets. > There is the YANG/NETCONF method, and I think that we should go in that > direction. > > A thought I had though.... could a HOMENET configuration be recorded by > capturing just HNCP traffic? Could a network configuration be restored > by essentially playing back that stuff? I'm pretty sure that this won't > work, but the question is... should it? > > Does this work fit into the charter? > > -- > ] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh > networks [ > ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | network > architect [ > ] m...@sandelman.ca http://www.sandelman.ca/ > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.sandelman.ca_&d=DwMFaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=LoGzhC-8sc8SY8Tq4vrfog&m=uuWiihYmTZHdlSwLjIDnf8fDYcahci1jFrEDQVRDWBM&s=frhxrsM8yiLM3JkOyRI0HavzzN3k4XrwesIkggWuR0E&e=> > | ruby on rails [ > > > > _______________________________________________ > homenet mailing list > homenet@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_homenet&d=DwMFaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=LoGzhC-8sc8SY8Tq4vrfog&m=uuWiihYmTZHdlSwLjIDnf8fDYcahci1jFrEDQVRDWBM&s=XnYMQ-A87X4UomP-wRjfJITHsZ87UoWghSpiPrGTNy8&e=> > > >
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
