Btw -- one aspect was mentioned by Mohan P. on v6ops list: whether the ND-proxy could decrement TTL instead of keeping it the same. I don't think whether this would affect this discussion (i.e., whether such a proxy would be considerably better in this respect) has been considered.
On Thu, 25 Mar 2004, Erik Nordmark wrote: > > The same helpdesk she calls when she encounters a weird problem in her > > network connectivity, or in her PC. Most likely you ;-) > > > > (This is a much more generic problem, not one specific to this > > scenario, obviously.) > > But in this particular case you seem to be arguing that plug&pray > is sufficient while I argue that we should aim for plug&play; > I think the futuristic goal is that wiring together network devices > shouldn't be more complex than plugging in electrical appliances. For the deployment I have in mind, plug&pray and plug&play are pretty much equivalent. There are certainly other things, labeled plug&play which are much more brittle than this :) > > You are making assumption that those boxes would also be acting as > > routers (in the ND-proxy mode) by default, right? I don't, and I > > don't think doing that would make a lot of sense. > > No. > I'm only making the same assumption that underlies ndproxy as well as the > zerouter discussion; there will be L2s that do not support IEEE 802 bridging. > If you disagree with this assumption we don't need ndproxy or zerouter > for the home networking case - IEEE 802 bridging has already solved the > problem. OK -- maybe you're thinking of this in more generic terms, like, every VCR or equivalent having its own (more or less) internal media for which IP connectivity would be desirable. And that such media would not be currently IEEE bridgeable. (And when you combine this to a scenario when such a "VCR++" has WLAN uplink to the other devices at home, you might end up in a mess. With wired connectivity, you'd be OK.) On the other hand, I have been looking at the scenario where an explicit set of "routers" (or a home PC or whatever) would be proxying for the nodes connecting to that box. We certainly seem to have an indication that the latter is important. I do not have personal knowledge if the former would be. It'd be interesting to know. -- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
