Stephen Farrell <stephen.farr...@cs.tcd.ie> wrote:
> On 05/06/2021 19:46, Michael Richardson wrote:
>> Well, I'd be happy to discuss with this them again, but they'd have to
>> actually tell us what "DDNS" really is for them.
> Just to clarify: I don't think/claim DDNS is "better" than
> the proposal here, rather I don't find the arguments as to
> why this is "better" convincing, and so, given that DDNS is
> deployed, and has some similarity, I'm wondering if this
> spec really has much of a chance at gaining traction.
I don't think that they solve the same problem, nor do they have the same
audience.
In particular, DDNS is very IPv4 specific and very divorced from ISP
operations, while the front-end naming is very IPv6 focused and integrates
much better with ISP operations.
Nothing we've done in Homenet has gained any traction, why do the chairs
suddenly care?
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
