Re: [homenet] [86all] Bits-N-Bites Lab Open
While I was in the room I do not recall that we tried this, we certainly can throughout today. I will work with the participants below to post an update on our efforts. I received offline email that would be welcome. I assume these updates would be welcome to the larger HOMENET mailing list. Thanks, John = John Jason Brzozowski Comcast Cable m) 484-962-0060 e) john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com o) 609-377-6594 w) www.comcast6.net = -Original Message- From: Michael Richardson mcr+i...@sandelman.ca Date: Thursday, March 14, 2013 9:14 AM To: HOMENET homenet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [homenet] [86all] Bits-N-Bites Lab Open event Thursday evening 19:00-21:00. Everything has been working very well in fact we have several implementations running already including: * eRouter * HIPNET * Buffer Bloat * HOMENET I don't take this to mean that HOMENET and HIPNET are interoperating? -- Michael Richardson -on the road- ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
Re: [homenet] [86all] Bits-N-Bites Lab Open
Will not work today or ever? Should we expect them to at some point? = John Jason Brzozowski Comcast Cable m) 484-962-0060 e) john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com o) 609-377-6594 w) www.comcast6.net = -Original Message- From: Lorenzo Colitti lore...@google.com Date: Thursday, March 14, 2013 9:25 AM To: Michael Richardson mcr+i...@sandelman.ca Cc: HOMENET homenet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [homenet] [86all] Bits-N-Bites Lab Open On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 6:14 AM, Michael Richardson mcr+i...@sandelman.ca wrote: I don't take this to mean that HOMENET and HIPNET are interoperating? We didn't try that. We expect a contiguous homenet network to work fine behind a HIPNET (it will just get a prefix via PD and use it), but HIPNET won't be able to get much of use from a SADR implementation. Mixing and matching devices wil not work. ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
Re: [homenet] [86all] Bits-N-Bites Lab Open
HOMENET is what I chose to call one of the implementations that is a result of some of the work in the same WG. HIPNET is an implementation of a DRAFT that was submitted to HOMENET in February (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-grundemann-homenet-hipnet-01). eRouter is specified by Cablelabs, more information can be found here (http://www.cablelabs.com/cablemodem/specifications/e-router.html) HTH, John = John Jason Brzozowski Comcast Cable m) 484-962-0060 e) john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com o) 609-377-6594 w) www.comcast6.net = -Original Message- From: Outback Dingo outbackdi...@gmail.com Date: Thursday, March 14, 2013 11:46 AM To: Lorenzo Colitti lore...@google.com Cc: Michael Richardson mcr+i...@sandelman.ca, HOMENET homenet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [homenet] [86all] Bits-N-Bites Lab Open On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 9:25 AM, Lorenzo Colitti lore...@google.com wrote: On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 6:14 AM, Michael Richardson mcr+i...@sandelman.ca wrote: I don't take this to mean that HOMENET and HIPNET are interoperating? We didn't try that. We expect a contiguous homenet network to work fine behind a HIPNET (it will just get a prefix via PD and use it), but HIPNET won't be able to get much of use from a SADR implementation. Okay, Im familiar with Bufferbloat :) whats HomeNET and HIPNET ?? and who sells this eRouter platform ?? I need to catch up here. Mixing and matching devices wil not work. ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
Re: [homenet] Home networking lab/testing READY!
Thanks for confirming. Let me know if there are things that you want to test before BnB tomorrow night. Thanks, John Lorenzo Colitti lore...@google.com wrote: John, Thanks for providing this infrastructure to test on. We were able to successfully test Markus's implementation and show working source+destination based routing. Video or it didn't happen: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Omg1lJ6EQIfeature=youtu.be Cheers, Lorenzo On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 6:21 AM, Brzozowski, John john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.commailto:john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com wrote: Folks, Day 2 has begun, we are open again from 9am to 5pm, or later upon request. We are again in Grand Sierra D. So far we have three implementations up and running, one HIPNET, one eRouter, and a buffer bloat implementation. We are planning on adding another implementation today. All are welcome to stop by and check us out. Thanks, John = John Jason Brzozowski Comcast Cable m) 484-962-0060tel:484-962-0060 e) john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.commailto:john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com o) 609-377-6594tel:609-377-6594 w) www.comcast6.nethttp://www.comcast6.net = -Original Message- From: Brzozowski, John Jason Brzozowski john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.commailto:john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com Date: Tuesday, March 12, 2013 7:57 AM To: HOMENET homenet@ietf.orgmailto:homenet@ietf.org Cc: Christopher Tuska christopher_tu...@cable.comcast.commailto:christopher_tu...@cable.comcast.com Subject: Re: [homenet] Home networking lab/testing READY! Sorry forgot to mention we are in Grand Sierra D. Upon arriving please see Chris Tuska from Comcast, copied above. John -Original Message- From: Brzozowski, John Jason Brzozowski john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.commailto:john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com Date: Monday, March 11, 2013 7:40 PM To: HOMENET homenet@ietf.orgmailto:homenet@ietf.org Subject: [homenet] Home networking lab/testing READY! Folks, We are ready to start testing tomorrow. I know of three implementations that are eRouter or HIPNET. There is room for more so please contact me offline if you are interested. We be open up to and including Bits-n-Bytes on Thursday evening. Doors open at 9am ET and will stay open until 5pm ET (or later upon request). Thanks, John ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.orgmailto:homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.orgmailto:homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
Re: [homenet] Home networking lab/testing READY!
Sorry forgot to mention we are in Grand Sierra D. Upon arriving please see Chris Tuska from Comcast, copied above. John -Original Message- From: Brzozowski, John Jason Brzozowski john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com Date: Monday, March 11, 2013 7:40 PM To: HOMENET homenet@ietf.org Subject: [homenet] Home networking lab/testing READY! Folks, We are ready to start testing tomorrow. I know of three implementations that are eRouter or HIPNET. There is room for more so please contact me offline if you are interested. We be open up to and including Bits-n-Bytes on Thursday evening. Doors open at 9am ET and will stay open until 5pm ET (or later upon request). Thanks, John ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
Re: [homenet] Home networking lab/testing
You are welcome to stop by. = John Jason Brzozowski Comcast Cable m) 484-962-0060 e) john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com o) 609-377-6594 w) www.comcast6.net = -Original Message- From: Acee Lindem acee.lin...@ericsson.com Date: Monday, March 11, 2013 6:46 PM To: Tim Chown t...@ecs.soton.ac.uk, Mark Townsley m...@townsley.net Cc: Brian Haberman br...@innovationslab.net, Markus Stenberg markus.stenb...@iki.fi, Ralph Droms rdr...@cisco.com, Ray Bellis ray.bel...@nominet.org.uk, Ted Lemon ted.le...@nominum.com, John Jason Brzozowski john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com, HOMENET homenet@ietf.org, Lorenzo Colitti lore...@google.com Subject: Re: [homenet] Home networking lab/testing I would like to see this. Acee From: Tim Chown t...@ecs.soton.ac.uk Date: Monday, March 11, 2013 9:28 AM To: Mark Townsley m...@townsley.net Cc: Brian Haberman br...@innovationslab.net, Markus Stenberg markus.stenb...@iki.fi, Ralph Droms rdr...@cisco.com, Ray Bellis ray.bel...@nominet.org.uk, Ted Lemon ted.le...@nominum.com, John Brzozowski john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com, HOMENET Group homenet@ietf.org, Lorenzo Colitti lore...@google.com Subject: Re: [homenet] Home networking lab/testing On 10 Mar 2013, at 17:47, Mark Townsley m...@townsley.net wrote: Markus and Ole are here next to me, with gear, working away in a Villa. Space certainly isn't a problem at this IETF! There was no plan to setup in public this time. One reason is Jari is too busy being a new IETF Chair this week, so chances of real interop work among independent implementations is limited. Maybe you can talk them into showing off later in the week. Something else Jari won't be doing for us this time: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/85/slides/slides-85-homenet-9.pdf Would the group like to see a 5-10 minute update on the OSPF-based implementation Markus has been working on during our meeting on Thursday? Hi Mark, I'd certainly like to hear a little about that, if there's space on the agenda. The demonstration at IETF85 was very promising, not only for the OSPF autoconfiguration but also the src/dst routing, so it would be interesting to hear what developments have been made since then. Tim ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
[homenet] Home networking lab/testing READY!
Folks, We are ready to start testing tomorrow. I know of three implementations that are eRouter or HIPNET. There is room for more so please contact me offline if you are interested. We be open up to and including Bits-n-Bytes on Thursday evening. Doors open at 9am ET and will stay open until 5pm ET (or later upon request). Thanks, John ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
Re: [homenet] Home networking lab/testing
-Original Message- From: Lorenzo Colitti lore...@google.com Date: Sunday, March 10, 2013 11:33 AM To: John Jason Brzozowski john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com Cc: HOMENET homenet@ietf.org, Ray Bellis ray.bel...@nominet.org.uk, Ted Lemon ted.le...@nominum.com, Brian Haberman br...@innovationslab.net, Mark Townsley towns...@cisco.com, Ralph Droms rdr...@cisco.com Subject: Re: [homenet] Home networking lab/testing On 9 Mar 2013 17:07, Brzozowski, John john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com wrote: Sorry for the late notice. We have some lab/testing space available for home networking running code *before* Bits-n-Bytes. I estimate that we will be able to get start as early as Tuesday and make the lab available until the afternoon before Bits-n-Bytes. Anyone interested in participating should send mail to the folks copied above as soon as possible. Will there be working cable modems? Can Mark/Markus demo their source/destination routing stuff? [jjmb] just like Atlanta, yes. And yes if they wish to test they are welcome. ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
Re: [homenet] Home networking lab/testing
I think it would be ideal to see the code working on a real broadband network. I recall the code had some issues last time. John -Original Message- From: Mark Townsley m...@townsley.net Date: Sunday, March 10, 2013 12:47 PM To: Lorenzo Colitti lore...@google.com Cc: John Jason Brzozowski john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com, HOMENET homenet@ietf.org, Ray Bellis ray.bel...@nominet.org.uk, Ted Lemon ted.le...@nominum.com, Brian Haberman br...@innovationslab.net, Ralph Droms rdr...@cisco.com, Markus Stenberg markus.stenb...@iki.fi Subject: Re: [homenet] Home networking lab/testing On Mar 10, 2013, at 12:33 PM, Lorenzo Colitti wrote: On 9 Mar 2013 17:07, Brzozowski, John john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com wrote: Sorry for the late notice. We have some lab/testing space available for home networking running code *before* Bits-n-Bytes. I estimate that we will be able to get start as early as Tuesday and make the lab available until the afternoon before Bits-n-Bytes. Anyone interested in participating should send mail to the folks copied above as soon as possible. Will there be working cable modems? Can Mark/Markus demo their source/destination routing stuff Markus and Ole are here next to me, with gear, working away in a Villa. Space certainly isn't a problem at this IETF! There was no plan to setup in public this time. One reason is Jari is too busy being a new IETF Chair this week, so chances of real interop work among independent implementations is limited. Maybe you can talk them into showing off later in the week. Something else Jari won't be doing for us this time: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/85/slides/slides-85-homenet-9.pdf Would the group like to see a 5-10 minute update on the OSPF-based implementation Markus has been working on during our meeting on Thursday? - Mark ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
Re: [homenet] Home networking lab/testing
We have much more time for setup this time assuming two days is adequate. It is your choice, let me know what you all decide. Thanks, John Markus Stenberg markus.stenb...@iki.fi wrote: On 10.3.2013, at 14.22, Brzozowski, John john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com wrote: I think it would be ideal to see the code working on a real broadband network. I recall the code had some issues last time. It was probably user error on either end of the topology, as -1 hours of setup time (negative value) wasn't enough for the BNB. BNB started 6pm, and you provided us with something 7pm with bunch of interested people at our table looking at the (backup) network connectivity-enabled setup. I'm moderately interested in repeating the experiment, but considering publicity we got from -1 hour setup time effort, I'm not as keen as I could be. Cheers, -Markus ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
[homenet] Home networking lab/testing
Folks, Sorry for the late notice. We have some lab/testing space available for home networking running code *before* Bits-n-Bytes. I estimate that we will be able to get start as early as Tuesday and make the lab available until the afternoon before Bits-n-Bytes. Anyone interested in participating should send mail to the folks copied above as soon as possible. Mark, Ray, Anything to add? Thank you, John = John Jason Brzozowski Comcast Cable m) 484-962-0060 e) john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com o) 609-377-6594 w) www.comcast6.net = ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
Re: [homenet] Naming and Service Discovery
-Original Message- From: Fernando Gont fg...@si6networks.com Date: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 8:55 AM To: Ted Lemon mel...@fugue.com Cc: homenet@ietf.org homenet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [homenet] Naming and Service Discovery On 02/26/2013 01:29 PM, Ted Lemon wrote: May I introduce a third option? mDNS for the local net, DNS to glue the multiple segments. That way, there's no additional code needed on the clients, no extensions needed for DNS, and just some software on the boxes linking the different network segments. I think that's what the mdns guys are talking about doing. My understanding was that they were going to extend mDNS to work on multiple segments, rather than gluing mDNS islands with DNS... but I have not really followed the discussions in the mdnsext. [jjmb] I thought this was one of the goals as well. I think it's a bad idea. It doesn't solve the multihoming problem; it's hard to figure out what problem it _does_ solve that can't be solved better using existing technology. Is there a requirements list for what naming/service discovery should achive? i.e., are those requirements documented? -- because that would be step #1 here. (yes, there are general requirements in the homenet charter, but was wondering if something had been written for naming and service discovery). [jjmb] there may be words, hard to say of if they are accurate. I confess I have not read them closely lately. Thanks, -- Fernando Gont SI6 Networks e-mail: fg...@si6networks.com PGP Fingerprint: 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492 ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
Re: [homenet] Running code in Orlando
Also for ISP that have this problem called growth activities of this type (renumbering) may be required to ensure capacity is properly managed which in turn is essential to a proper customer experience. = John Jason Brzozowski Comcast Cable m) 484-962-0060 e) john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com o) 609-377-6594 w) www.comcast6.net = -Original Message- From: Wuyts Carl carl.wu...@technicolor.com Date: Friday, February 22, 2013 6:51 AM To: Ted Lemon mel...@fugue.com, Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com Cc: Michael Richardson mcr+i...@sandelman.ca, Mark Townsley m...@townsley.net, Dave Taht dave.t...@gmail.com, Jari Arkko jari.ar...@piuha.net, John Jason Brzozowski john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com, homenet@ietf.org Group homenet@ietf.org, David Lamparter equi...@diac24.net, Lorenzo Colitti lore...@google.com Subject: RE: [homenet] Running code in Orlando Small add-on to the address-renew policy @ some ISPs Some ISPs do refresh the IP every XX hours for several reasons: * privacy * different contracts, i.e. you pay more for fixed IP over dynamic IP, i.e. allows hosting on same IP The same will be applied for IPv6. Best regards Carl Wuyts Help preserve the color of our world - Think before you print. -Original Message- From: homenet-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:homenet-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ted Lemon Sent: vrijdag 22 februari 2013 15:48 To: Michael Thomas Cc: Michael Richardson; Mark Townsley; Dave Taht; Jari Arkko; Brzozowski, John; homenet@ietf.org Group; David Lamparter; Lorenzo Colitti Subject: Re: [homenet] Running code in Orlando On Feb 21, 2013, at 8:34 PM, Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com wrote: Sigh all you like, but I share Dave's skepticism that ISP's renumbering my prefix willy-nilly and it just sort of works with naming -- including addresses squirrelled away in places they ought not be -- is going to work any time soon. I don't like to think that NAT is inevitable but frankly the people in this working group don't get to vote on that. It's probably also worth mentioning that in general ISPs that do this on a regular basis are attacking their customer's network, and the resulting instability is not the result of a failing on our part, but deliberate action on the part of the ISP. There are countries where ISPs are required by law to _offer_ a change of address every 24 hours for privacy purposes. At least in the cases I'm aware of, ISPs don't _force_ this on their customers, but rather it's a configuration option paranoid customers can choose, which may default to on.This is an inconvenience to ISPs, because it causes address pool churn, and requires a lot of extra bits to be allocated to PE devices to accommodate all the deprecated addresses. Pretty much by definition, if you want to access your washing machine while away from home, you're throwing that particular sort of privacy right out the window. It wasn't buying you much anyway--fuzzing the prefix by a few bits is very easy to reverse, and because of routing hierarchies, IPv6 prefixes can't be assigned to the customer out of the ISP's entire address space--by definition they will be restricted to localities. The other use case for frequent renumbering is an ISP who wants to prevent the customer from setting up servers. The washing machine is a server. Either the ISP succeeds, or fails, but in either case, they are acting directly against the customer's wishes.We can try to design a system that's robust with respect to attacks like this, but in practice the best way to address this problem is to prevent it happening on a regular basis to people who will care about it. ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
Re: [homenet] NPTv6-only home networks
My point was more that that NPTv6 doesn't make that any easier, more secure, or... anything, really. You still have to update the address somewhere; all that NPTv6 gives you is that now the washing machine doesn't know what its IPv6 address is. Right? [jjmb] yes and I agree with your points. ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
Re: [homenet] NPTv6-only home networks
I thought mdnsext was supposed to handle this now? Still agree it should be covered some where. -Original Message- From: Ted Lemon mel...@fugue.com Date: Friday, February 22, 2013 4:27 AM To: Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com Cc: Michael Richardson mcr+i...@sandelman.ca, Mark Townsley m...@townsley.net, Dave Taht dave.t...@gmail.com, Jari Arkko jari.ar...@piuha.net, John Jason Brzozowski john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com, homenet@ietf.org Group homenet@ietf.org, Lorenzo Colitti lore...@google.com, David Lamparter equi...@diac24.net Subject: Re: [homenet] NPTv6-only home networks On Feb 21, 2013, at 10:45 PM, Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com wrote: Well, if one of the requirements is that I be able to control my washing machine from across the continent, I'm not sure why we're even screwing with mdns in this wg. And if that's not a requirement for this working group, I have to ask which century it got chartered in. +1 ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
Re: [homenet] NPTv6-only home networks
Do you populate A-DNS with hosts learned from mDNS and advertise hosts in A-DNS via mDNS? :O = John Jason Brzozowski Comcast Cable m) 484-962-0060 e) john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com o) 609-377-6594 w) www.comcast6.net = -Original Message- From: Simon Kelley si...@thekelleys.org.uk Date: Friday, February 22, 2013 5:00 AM To: homenet@ietf.org homenet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [homenet] NPTv6-only home networks On 22/02/13 12:30, Ted Lemon wrote: On Feb 21, 2013, at 11:31 PM, Lorenzo Colitti lore...@google.com wrote: I think the issue that Michael imagines NPTv6 will address is the transition period, when the washing machine has two IP addresses, and the DNS may not have the new address, or may have both addresses, and he's hoping the gateway will somehow bandage this up. However, the gateway's ability to bandage this up is more imagined than real, and we might as well just fix the underlying problem. The current development release of dnsmasq can act as an authoritative DNS server populated with all hosts on a homenet which it knows about from DHCP. Delegate your domain to it, and ensure that the TTL configured for DNS is smaller than the deprecated lifetime of addresses, and this problem should never arise. ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
Re: [homenet] NPTv6-only home networks
DLNA seems to have some challenges seeing how IPv6 is relevant for them in the future, I think UPnP has done some work however upper layer protocols/applications must still require the use of the same. -Original Message- From: Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com Date: Friday, February 22, 2013 7:24 AM To: Joel Jaeggli joe...@bogus.com Cc: Lorenzo Colitti lore...@google.com, Michael Richardson mcr+i...@sandelman.ca, Mark Townsley m...@townsley.net, Dave Taht dave.t...@gmail.com, Jari Arkko jari.ar...@piuha.net, John Jason Brzozowski john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com, homenet@ietf.org Group homenet@ietf.org, David Lamparter equi...@diac24.net Subject: Re: [homenet] NPTv6-only home networks joel jaeggli wrote: On 2/21/13 7:04 PM, Michael Thomas wrote: So, I think what we can observe from the number of readily discoverable security cameras on the internet. was that the real-live requirement was at least partially solved thanks to upnp and dynamic dns registration, is not a geek-only-oddity, survives renumbering, and was for the most part done quite badly. hopefully it can be done better in the future. I was under the impression that upnp is exactly what we should not be aspiring to, but that we'll get by default (like natv6) if nothing useful happens in ietf. Mike ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
Re: [homenet] Servers in the home are not a crime
Misguided. -Original Message- From: Mark Andrews ma...@isc.org Date: Sunday, February 24, 2013 12:21 PM To: Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com Cc: John Jason Brzozowski john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com, Michael Richardson mcr+i...@sandelman.ca, Mark Townsley m...@townsley.net, Dave Taht dave.t...@gmail.com, Jari Arkko jari.ar...@piuha.net, Ted Lemon mel...@fugue.com, homenet@ietf.org Group homenet@ietf.org, David Lamparter equi...@diac24.net, Lorenzo Colitti lore...@google.com Subject: Re: [homenet] Servers in the home are not a crime In message 512958cb.8000...@mtcc.com, Michael Thomas writes: Brzozowski, John wrote: The other use case for frequent renumbering is an ISP who wants to prevent the customer from setting up servers. The washing machine is a server. Either the ISP succeeds, or fails, but in either case, they are acting directly against the customer's wishes. [jjmb] are a customer is violating their usage agreement with the ISP. Is there any way this working group can make a statement that my washing mach ine, home cameras, DVR, hot tub, thermostat, and light sockets, etc, etc, etc are not TOS-worth scofflaws, and that ISP should come up with some 21st century w ay of describing abusive behaviour for their customers rather than relying on detec tion of the heinous crime of listen(2)? Actually ISP's that renumber their customers regularly are performing a DoS on their customers which actually may be illegal rather than just a contract violation as they are deliberately breaking existing connections. I've seen software updates take longer than a hour to download. They also can't in good faith be said to be delivering the Internet. They generally have to break protocol default behaviors and write specialised servers to get this broken behaviour. There is a expectation that when you renew a lease that you will get the same address unless it is a exceptional circumstance. Mike ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
Re: [homenet] NPTv6-only home networks
I believe this is accurate. = John Jason Brzozowski Comcast Cable m) 484-962-0060 e) john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com o) 609-377-6594 w) www.comcast6.net = -Original Message- From: Joel Jaeggli joe...@bogus.com Date: Sunday, February 24, 2013 10:27 AM To: John Jason Brzozowski john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com, Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com Cc: Michael Richardson mcr+i...@sandelman.ca, Mark Townsley m...@townsley.net, Dave Taht dave.t...@gmail.com, Jari Arkko jari.ar...@piuha.net, homenet@ietf.org Group homenet@ietf.org, David Lamparter equi...@diac24.net, Lorenzo Colitti lore...@google.com Subject: Re: [homenet] NPTv6-only home networks On 2/24/13 9:41 AM, Brzozowski, John wrote: DLNA seems to have some challenges seeing how IPv6 is relevant for them in the future, I think UPnP has done some work however upper layer protocols/applications must still require the use of the same. Practically speaking, iirc they have to some challenges to make their toolchain work across more than one subnet. -Original Message- From: Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com Date: Friday, February 22, 2013 7:24 AM To: Joel Jaeggli joe...@bogus.com Cc: Lorenzo Colitti lore...@google.com, Michael Richardson mcr+i...@sandelman.ca, Mark Townsley m...@townsley.net, Dave Taht dave.t...@gmail.com, Jari Arkko jari.ar...@piuha.net, John Jason Brzozowski john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com, homenet@ietf.org Group homenet@ietf.org, David Lamparter equi...@diac24.net Subject: Re: [homenet] NPTv6-only home networks joel jaeggli wrote: On 2/21/13 7:04 PM, Michael Thomas wrote: So, I think what we can observe from the number of readily discoverable security cameras on the internet. was that the real-live requirement was at least partially solved thanks to upnp and dynamic dns registration, is not a geek-only-oddity, survives renumbering, and was for the most part done quite badly. hopefully it can be done better in the future. I was under the impression that upnp is exactly what we should not be aspiring to, but that we'll get by default (like natv6) if nothing useful happens in ietf. Mike ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
Re: [homenet] Running code in Orlando
-Original Message- From: Ted Lemon mel...@fugue.com Date: Friday, February 22, 2013 6:48 AM To: Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com Cc: Lorenzo Colitti lore...@google.com, Michael Richardson mcr+i...@sandelman.ca, Mark Townsley m...@townsley.net, Dave Taht dave.t...@gmail.com, Jari Arkko jari.ar...@piuha.net, John Jason Brzozowski john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com, homenet@ietf.org Group homenet@ietf.org, David Lamparter equi...@diac24.net Subject: Re: [homenet] Running code in Orlando On Feb 21, 2013, at 8:34 PM, Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com wrote: Sigh all you like, but I share Dave's skepticism that ISP's renumbering my prefix willy-nilly and it just sort of works with naming -- including addresses squirrelled away in places they ought not be -- is going to work any time soon. I don't like to think that NAT is inevitable but frankly the people in this working group don't get to vote on that. It's probably also worth mentioning that in general ISPs that do this on a regular basis are attacking their customer's network, and the resulting instability is not the result of a failing on our part, but deliberate action on the part of the ISP. [jjmb] not sure I would say renumbering is attacking, it may be referred to as running a network. FWIW this happens today with IPv4. There are countries where ISPs are required by law to _offer_ a change of address every 24 hours for privacy purposes. At least in the cases I'm aware of, ISPs don't _force_ this on their customers, but rather it's a configuration option paranoid customers can choose, which may default to on.This is an inconvenience to ISPs, because it causes address pool churn, and requires a lot of extra bits to be allocated to PE devices to accommodate all the deprecated addresses. [jjmb] first I have heard of this, interesting. Pretty much by definition, if you want to access your washing machine while away from home, you're throwing that particular sort of privacy right out the window. It wasn't buying you much anyway--fuzzing the prefix by a few bits is very easy to reverse, and because of routing hierarchies, IPv6 prefixes can't be assigned to the customer out of the ISP's entire address space--by definition they will be restricted to localities. The other use case for frequent renumbering is an ISP who wants to prevent the customer from setting up servers. The washing machine is a server. Either the ISP succeeds, or fails, but in either case, they are acting directly against the customer's wishes. [jjmb] are a customer is violating their usage agreement with the ISP. We can try to design a system that's robust with respect to attacks like this, but in practice the best way to address this problem is to prevent it happening on a regular basis to people who will care about it. ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
Re: [homenet] Running code in Orlando
-Original Message- From: Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com Date: Friday, February 22, 2013 7:41 AM To: John Jason Brzozowski john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com Cc: Lorenzo Colitti lore...@google.com, Michael Richardson mcr+i...@sandelman.ca, Mark Townsley m...@townsley.net, Dave Taht dave.t...@gmail.com, Jari Arkko jari.ar...@piuha.net, homenet@ietf.org Group homenet@ietf.org, David Lamparter equi...@diac24.net Subject: Re: [homenet] Running code in Orlando Brzozowski, John wrote: general? Yes, along with naming, security, prefix delegation across multiple routers, and isp's giving and withdrawing prefixes due to renumbering. I'm dubious that this has happened in real life with networks with people whose day job is to worry about such things, and I'd be astonished to hear such a thing has been shown to work on a home network. [jjmb] hmmm we have quite a few real customers that are using IPv6 enabled on a daily basis mostly using technology that we specified ~8 years ago. Does this count? Not really because my understanding is that these networks are giving a service that is pretty much the same as their v4 counterpart which is completely client centric. [jjmb] I disagree it counts, sorry. When you say client centric you mean clients accessing the Internet not accessing the home from the Internet? I seriously want globally accessible servers on my home network to be 1st class citizens and that implies naming and security/admission control. The future is now: a Raspberry Pi is $35. Tomorrow, we'll be getting gratuitous IP-enabled controllers on everything whether we want them or not just like when digital controls replaced analog. Mike ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
Re: [homenet] Running code in Orlando
Mark you can always reach out to me. I can help make sure the correct technical requirements are outlined. I also have been working closely on BnB so there may be some overlap we can help avoid. = John Jason Brzozowski Comcast Cable m) 484-962-0060 e) john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com o) 609-377-6594 w) www.comcast6.net = -Original Message- From: Mark Townsley m...@townsley.net Date: Friday, February 22, 2013 9:24 AM To: John Jason Brzozowski john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com Cc: Dave Taht dave.t...@gmail.com, Michael Richardson mcr+i...@sandelman.ca, Jari Arkko jari.ar...@piuha.net, homenet@ietf.org Group homenet@ietf.org, David Lamparter equi...@diac24.net, Lorenzo Colitti lore...@google.com Subject: Re: [homenet] Running code in Orlando On Feb 21, 2013, at 5:57 PM, Brzozowski, John wrote: Since BnB is one night can we make provisions for the home net lab area to be open all week? Mark? Ray? Let's give it a shot! But... the chairs can only make the request. Allocating IETF space is something only the ADs are authorized to do. In Atlanta, I asked for space and was turned down (citing too short notice, specs not mature enough, etc.). IPSO graciously gave us some squatting room, but we were not able to get what we needed from the IETF NOC in that particular location. So, while good work was done, it came with support headaches (e.g., ISP uplinks were simulated via tunnels sourced from a router than joined the IETF network like any other wireless host). Seems like it would be worth it. I am thinking all week would be ideal. ;) I think that's a necessity. The request I sent in January to the list included: Note that this isn't for 'showcasing', but for working... so be expected to configure, reconfigure, and change code on the fly accordingly. I think that is very important, and in order for that to happen, we need more than a couple of hours here or there. What I am hearing is that we currently have requests to provide workspace for: 1. draft-grundemann-homenet-hipnet-00 2. perhaps CeroWRT? 3. perhaps draft-arkko-homenet-prefix-assignment and draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-autoconfig again? Last time, we were asked from the ADs things like: - How many implementations existed and how many would be present on site to test. - What drafts or RFCs would be tested - How much space, and for how long - Power and network requirements etc... John B, Dave T, are the two of you the right folks for us to work offline with in order to try and put together the right ask? Thanks, - Mark = John Jason Brzozowski Comcast Cable m) 484-962-0060 e) john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com o) 609-377-6594 w) www.comcast6.net = -Original Message- From: Dave Taht dave.t...@gmail.com Date: Thursday, February 21, 2013 9:35 AM To: John Jason Brzozowski john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com Cc: David Lamparter equi...@diac24.net, Michael Richardson mcr+i...@sandelman.ca, homenet@ietf.org Group homenet@ietf.org, Mark Townsley m...@townsley.net, Jari Arkko jari.ar...@piuha.net, Lorenzo Colitti lore...@google.com Subject: Re: [homenet] Running code in Orlando I am primarily focused on demonstrating solutions to bufferbloat in my portion of bit's and bytes. But I note that the present CeroWrt build appears to have working dhcp-pd (I've successfully got /56 /60, /61/ /62 subnets from it), and assigning that to the 6+ internal interfaces, support for every other form of ipv6 tunneling, the latest dnsmasq which has some good ways of bonding dns names to ipv6 s, support for routing ipv4 and ipv6 subnetworks over the quagga babel protocol (the two routers I'm demoing are meshed together at 5ghz) We had to fix a few nasty instruction traps in the ipv6 stack last month, but after doing that, I'm pretty pleased with the over-all performance and reliability - it survived the thc ipv6 tests handily, for example. Could use some more exaustive real-world testing, so, get it (for the wndr3700v2 and 3800 series) http://snapon.lab.bufferbloat.net/~cero2/cerowrt/wndr/3.7.5-2/ We also have specialized builds for the ubiquity nanostation m5 and picostation m2hp products deployed in the campground testbed. We still haven't done anything with distributing prefixes inside the home beside ahcp, and I still find the dynamicism required by renting ipv6 addresses to so impact in so many aspects of the sane usage of stuff like printers, and naming, and the security model as to *demand* ipv6 nat in the home... but I did not get around to implementing npt66 in this release!! (so those that would flame me for this opinion can hold off (pretty please!?) until perhaps I can go into the implementation details of all the many things that break today... with those that care. ) In terms of interop
Re: [homenet] Running code in Orlando
Not sure I buy the security model angle, IPv4 NAT != security. It would be great if we had a group working on service discoveryŠoh wait!? = John Jason Brzozowski Comcast Cable m) 484-962-0060 e) john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com o) 609-377-6594 w) www.comcast6.net = -Original Message- From: Lorenzo Colitti lore...@google.com Date: Thursday, February 21, 2013 5:06 PM To: Dave Taht dave.t...@gmail.com Cc: John Jason Brzozowski john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com, David Lamparter equi...@diac24.net, Michael Richardson mcr+i...@sandelman.ca, homenet@ietf.org Group homenet@ietf.org, Mark Townsley m...@townsley.net, Jari Arkko jari.ar...@piuha.net Subject: Re: [homenet] Running code in Orlando On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 1:35 AM, Dave Taht dave.t...@gmail.com wrote: I still find the dynamicism required by renting ipv6 addresses to so impact in so many aspects of the sane usage of stuff like printers, and naming, and the security model as to *demand* ipv6 nat in the home... Sigh. ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
Re: [homenet] Running code in Orlando
I second the sigh FWIW. And I do not share Dave's view on IPv6 NAT. What are you asking to be demonstrated? IPv6 NAT? = John Jason Brzozowski Comcast Cable m) 484-962-0060 e) john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com o) 609-377-6594 w) www.comcast6.net = -Original Message- From: Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com Date: Thursday, February 21, 2013 5:34 PM To: Lorenzo Colitti lore...@google.com Cc: Dave Taht dave.t...@gmail.com, Michael Richardson mcr+i...@sandelman.ca, Mark Townsley m...@townsley.net, Jari Arkko jari.ar...@piuha.net, John Jason Brzozowski john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com, homenet@ietf.org Group homenet@ietf.org, David Lamparter equi...@diac24.net Subject: Re: [homenet] Running code in Orlando Lorenzo Colitti wrote: On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 1:35 AM, Dave Taht dave.t...@gmail.com mailto:dave.t...@gmail.com wrote: I still find the dynamicism required by renting ipv6 addresses to so impact in so many aspects of the sane usage of stuff like printers, and naming, and the security model as to *demand* ipv6 nat in the home... Sigh. Sigh all you like, but I share Dave's skepticism that ISP's renumbering my prefix willy-nilly and it just sort of works with naming -- including addresses squirrelled away in places they ought not be -- is going to work any time soon. I don't like to think that NAT is inevitable but frankly the people in this working group don't get to vote on that. Speaking to the title of this thread: has anybody actually demonstrated such a thing end to end? It strikes me as Frankensteinian when you get all of the body parts bolted together. Mike ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
Re: [homenet] Running code in Orlando
Actually they do. They have the freedom to specify alternatives, and depending on how good a job they do, implementers may choose to use them. Šand providing that these are specified by people who know what they doing and understand the problem that is being solved/addressed. :O ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
Re: [homenet] Running code in Orlando
-Original Message- From: Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com Date: Thursday, February 21, 2013 5:57 PM To: Lorenzo Colitti lore...@google.com Cc: Dave Taht dave.t...@gmail.com, Michael Richardson mcr+i...@sandelman.ca, Mark Townsley m...@townsley.net, Jari Arkko jari.ar...@piuha.net, John Jason Brzozowski john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com, homenet@ietf.org Group homenet@ietf.org, David Lamparter equi...@diac24.net Subject: Re: [homenet] Running code in Orlando Lorenzo Colitti wrote: On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 10:34 AM, Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com mailto:m...@mtcc.com wrote: Sigh. Sigh all you like, but I share Dave's skepticism that ISP's renumbering my prefix willy-nilly and it just sort of works with naming -- including addresses squirrelled away in places they ought not be -- is going to work any time soon. That's why we have ULAs and multiple prefixes. ULA's are of limited use. I still want to start my washing machine regardless of whether I'm at home or not. [jjmb] maybe today, who knows about tomorrow. I don't like to think that NAT is inevitable but frankly the people in this working group don't get to vote on that. Actually they do. They have the freedom to specify alternatives, and depending on how good a job they do, implementers may choose to use them. Wishful thinking. NAT's didn't start with the blessing of IETF as I recall. They just happened. If the alternatives are too whacked out, history will repeat itself. [jjmb] not sure I agree here, the conditions and parameters are different today specifically there are currently no issues with IPv6 resource availability. Speaking to the title of this thread: has anybody actually demonstrated such a thing end to end? It strikes me as Frankensteinian when you get all of the body parts bolted together. What thing exactly? Multiprefix multihoming? End-to-end connectivity in general? Yes, along with naming, security, prefix delegation across multiple routers, and isp's giving and withdrawing prefixes due to renumbering. I'm dubious that this has happened in real life with networks with people whose day job is to worry about such things, and I'd be astonished to hear such a thing has been shown to work on a home network. [jjmb] hmmm we have quite a few real customers that are using IPv6 enabled on a daily basis mostly using technology that we specified ~8 years ago. Does this count? Mike ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
Re: [homenet] Running code in Orlando
Statically assigning prefixes may enable testing but is not how homes will be provisioned in reality. = John Jason Brzozowski Comcast Cable m) 484-962-0060 e) john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com o) 609-377-6594 w) www.comcast6.net = -Original Message- From: David Lamparter equi...@diac24.net Date: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 9:41 PM To: John Jason Brzozowski john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com Cc: David Lamparter equi...@diac24.net, Lorenzo Colitti lore...@google.com, Michael Richardson mcr+i...@sandelman.ca, homenet@ietf.org Group homenet@ietf.org, Jari Arkko jari.ar...@piuha.net, Mark Townsley m...@townsley.net Subject: Re: [homenet] Running code in Orlando On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 04:17:06AM +, Brzozowski, John wrote: David Lamparter wrote: On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 12:40:25PM +0900, Lorenzo Colitti wrote: On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 12:16 PM, Michael Richardson mcr+i...@sandelman.cawrote: Would/could another foot of such a network be on the IETF network? If the IETF network didn't respond to DHCPv6 PD requests, it wouldn't be much use. Even without DHCPv6 PD on the remainder of the IETF network, it might be possible to get a /52../56 and run a DHCPv6 PD ourselves, emulating part of the provider network. Why emulate it? Is the intention here to test the the code on an enterprise or corporate network? The scope of the plugfest is the interior and border of the homenet. To get the border right, we need the service provider side of that border in some form. If the IETF network runs DHCPv6-PD, that is an usable approximation. My suggestion was for the case that the IETF network won't be running DHCPv6-PD. In that case, the easiest way to make the IETF network usable as one uplink for the homenet plugfest is to ask for a /52 to be made available for the plugfest in some static way and then provide DHCPv6-PD from that, running on some random PC box/laptop somewhere. Actually - controlling the DHCPv6-PD might be advantageous in order to allow tinkering with it to see how the testbed reacts. -David ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
Re: [homenet] Running code in Orlando
Since BnB is one night can we make provisions for the home net lab area to be open all week? Mark? Ray? Seems like it would be worth it. I am thinking all week would be ideal. ;) = John Jason Brzozowski Comcast Cable m) 484-962-0060 e) john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com o) 609-377-6594 w) www.comcast6.net = -Original Message- From: Dave Taht dave.t...@gmail.com Date: Thursday, February 21, 2013 9:35 AM To: John Jason Brzozowski john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com Cc: David Lamparter equi...@diac24.net, Michael Richardson mcr+i...@sandelman.ca, homenet@ietf.org Group homenet@ietf.org, Mark Townsley m...@townsley.net, Jari Arkko jari.ar...@piuha.net, Lorenzo Colitti lore...@google.com Subject: Re: [homenet] Running code in Orlando I am primarily focused on demonstrating solutions to bufferbloat in my portion of bit's and bytes. But I note that the present CeroWrt build appears to have working dhcp-pd (I've successfully got /56 /60, /61/ /62 subnets from it), and assigning that to the 6+ internal interfaces, support for every other form of ipv6 tunneling, the latest dnsmasq which has some good ways of bonding dns names to ipv6 s, support for routing ipv4 and ipv6 subnetworks over the quagga babel protocol (the two routers I'm demoing are meshed together at 5ghz) We had to fix a few nasty instruction traps in the ipv6 stack last month, but after doing that, I'm pretty pleased with the over-all performance and reliability - it survived the thc ipv6 tests handily, for example. Could use some more exaustive real-world testing, so, get it (for the wndr3700v2 and 3800 series) http://snapon.lab.bufferbloat.net/~cero2/cerowrt/wndr/3.7.5-2/ We also have specialized builds for the ubiquity nanostation m5 and picostation m2hp products deployed in the campground testbed. We still haven't done anything with distributing prefixes inside the home beside ahcp, and I still find the dynamicism required by renting ipv6 addresses to so impact in so many aspects of the sane usage of stuff like printers, and naming, and the security model as to *demand* ipv6 nat in the home... but I did not get around to implementing npt66 in this release!! (so those that would flame me for this opinion can hold off (pretty please!?) until perhaps I can go into the implementation details of all the many things that break today... with those that care. ) In terms of interop, besides dhcp-pd and bufferbloat fixes, I'd rather like to see if these release can be made to work with ospfv6 on other devices. What else will be shown? The original homenet code was far too large to be usable on such a small device, but perhaps at least the ospf layer could be tried. And all that said, I'm rather totally buried with tests for, processing a ton of data from the field, and testing nfq_codel/bufferbloat. I just finished giving talks on that at MIT and Stanford on that stuff What's wrong with wifi? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wksh2DPHCDIfeature=youtu.be Intro to codel and fq_codel: http://netseminar.stanford.edu/ On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 8:14 AM, Brzozowski, John john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com wrote: Statically assigning prefixes may enable testing but is not how homes will be provisioned in reality. = John Jason Brzozowski Comcast Cable m) 484-962-0060 tel:484-962-0060 e) john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com o) 609-377-6594 tel:609-377-6594 w) www.comcast6.net http://www.comcast6.net = -Original Message- From: David Lamparter equi...@diac24.net Date: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 9:41 PM To: John Jason Brzozowski john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com Cc: David Lamparter equi...@diac24.net, Lorenzo Colitti lore...@google.com, Michael Richardson mcr+i...@sandelman.ca mailto:mcr%2bi...@sandelman.ca, homenet@ietf.org Group homenet@ietf.org, Jari Arkko jari.ar...@piuha.net, Mark Townsley m...@townsley.net Subject: Re: [homenet] Running code in Orlando On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 04:17:06AM +, Brzozowski, John wrote: David Lamparter wrote: On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 12:40:25PM +0900, Lorenzo Colitti wrote: On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 12:16 PM, Michael Richardson mcr+i...@sandelman.ca mailto:mcr%2bi...@sandelman.cawrote: Would/could another foot of such a network be on the IETF network? If the IETF network didn't respond to DHCPv6 PD requests, it wouldn't be much use. Even without DHCPv6 PD on the remainder of the IETF network, it might be possible to get a /52../56 and run a DHCPv6 PD ourselves, emulating part of the provider network. Why emulate it? Is the intention here to test the the code on an enterprise or corporate network? The scope of the plugfest is the interior and border of the homenet. To get the border right, we need the service provider side of that border in some form. If the IETF network runs DHCPv6-PD
Re: [homenet] Running code in Orlando
Folks, I expect to have a DOCSIS network available during IETF86 for Bits-n-Bytes if there is interest in having real broadband equipment in the HOMENET lab please let me know I will do my best to accommodate. After we got everything up an running I recall that some (or all) of the running code that was available during IETF85 had some issue interoperating with a live IPv6 enabled broadband network. The cable broadband network was functioning as it does today in production. I wanted to make sure everyone was aware that the environment would be available again in case there was an interest in testing (and/or fixing) their implementations. Regards, John = John Jason Brzozowski Comcast Cable m) +1-609-377-6594 e) mailto:john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com o) +1-484-962-0060 w) http://www.comcast6.net = -Original Message- From: Mark Townsley m...@townsley.net Date: Monday, January 21, 2013 12:25 PM To: homenet@ietf.org Group homenet@ietf.org Subject: [homenet] Running code in Orlando Group, Happy new year everyone. The next IETF will be upon us soon. Last IETF, we had two implementations based on draft-arkko-homenet-prefix-assignment and draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-autoconfig running about. Bugs in code as well as bugs in specs were found. We had a number of people bringing along their hosts and plugging them into the various router ports, and people randomly changing the wiring to see if would keep working. Ironically, uplinks to the outside world gave us some of the biggest headaches, and with better planning we should be able to alleviate those problems if we do this again. In any case, it was overall a positive experience, and we're considering now whether or not to try and do it again. If you have an implementation of a protocol within the scope of the homenet charter and homenet architecture (draft-ietf-homenet-arch-06) based on an internet draft targeted to the homenet working group that you would like to test with others, please send the list or chairs an email so we can evaluate whether or not to schedule a place for you to get together and work with others in person in Orlando. Note that this isn't for showcasing, but for working... so be expected to configure, reconfigure, and change code on the fly accordingly. Please let us know ASAP, as March is coming soon! Thanks, - Mark Ray ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
Re: [homenet] Running code in Orlando
We were delegating /56s last time. Definitely doable in Orlando. John = John Jason Brzozowski Comcast Cable m) 484-962-0060 e) john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com o) 609-377-6594 w) www.comcast6.net = -Original Message- From: Lorenzo Colitti lore...@google.com Date: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 7:21 PM To: John Jason Brzozowski john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com, Jari Arkko jari.ar...@piuha.net Cc: Mark Townsley m...@townsley.net, homenet@ietf.org Group homenet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [homenet] Running code in Orlando +1 for stuff that works in the real world. Running code isn't running code if it doesn't, well, run. :-) Mark, Jari, is it possible to revive the autoconfig/source-routing demo that we had in Atlanta? Even if it's only for a limited time, I think it's important to show that (or whether, depending on your point of view) this stuff can work in the real world. John: assuming it's possible to revive the demo, then I think it would be enough to have two cable modems connected to a live network that hands out something larger than /64 by default. If we don't have PD or if we don't have greater than /64 then there's not much point in attempting routing. :-) Does that sound possible? On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 5:24 AM, Brzozowski, John john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com wrote: Folks, I expect to have a DOCSIS network available during IETF86 for Bits-n-Bytes if there is interest in having real broadband equipment in the HOMENET lab please let me know I will do my best to accommodate. After we got everything up an running I recall that some (or all) of the running code that was available during IETF85 had some issue interoperating with a live IPv6 enabled broadband network. The cable broadband network was functioning as it does today in production. I wanted to make sure everyone was aware that the environment would be available again in case there was an interest in testing (and/or fixing) their implementations. Regards, John = John Jason Brzozowski Comcast Cable m) +1-609-377-6594 tel:%2B1-609-377-6594 e) mailto:john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com o) +1-484-962-0060 tel:%2B1-484-962-0060 w) http://www.comcast6.net = -Original Message- From: Mark Townsley m...@townsley.net Date: Monday, January 21, 2013 12:25 PM To: homenet@ietf.org Group homenet@ietf.org Subject: [homenet] Running code in Orlando Group, Happy new year everyone. The next IETF will be upon us soon. Last IETF, we had two implementations based on draft-arkko-homenet-prefix-assignment and draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-autoconfig running about. Bugs in code as well as bugs in specs were found. We had a number of people bringing along their hosts and plugging them into the various router ports, and people randomly changing the wiring to see if would keep working. Ironically, uplinks to the outside world gave us some of the biggest headaches, and with better planning we should be able to alleviate those problems if we do this again. In any case, it was overall a positive experience, and we're considering now whether or not to try and do it again. If you have an implementation of a protocol within the scope of the homenet charter and homenet architecture (draft-ietf-homenet-arch-06) based on an internet draft targeted to the homenet working group that you would like to test with others, please send the list or chairs an email so we can evaluate whether or not to schedule a place for you to get together and work with others in person in Orlando. Note that this isn't for showcasing, but for working... so be expected to configure, reconfigure, and change code on the fly accordingly. Please let us know ASAP, as March is coming soon! Thanks, - Mark Ray ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
Re: [homenet] Running code in Orlando
Why emulate it? Is the intention here to test the the code on an enterprise or corporate network? = John Jason Brzozowski Comcast Cable m) 484-962-0060 e) john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com o) 609-377-6594 w) www.comcast6.net = -Original Message- From: David Lamparter equi...@diac24.net Date: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 8:49 PM To: Lorenzo Colitti lore...@google.com Cc: Michael Richardson mcr+i...@sandelman.ca, Mark Townsley m...@townsley.net, homenet@ietf.org Group homenet@ietf.org, Jari Arkko jari.ar...@piuha.net, John Jason Brzozowski john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com Subject: Re: [homenet] Running code in Orlando On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 12:40:25PM +0900, Lorenzo Colitti wrote: On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 12:16 PM, Michael Richardson mcr+i...@sandelman.cawrote: Would/could another foot of such a network be on the IETF network? If the IETF network didn't respond to DHCPv6 PD requests, it wouldn't be much use. Even without DHCPv6 PD on the remainder of the IETF network, it might be possible to get a /52../56 and run a DHCPv6 PD ourselves, emulating part of the provider network. ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
Re: [homenet] DNS and IPV6 within the home
On 9/14/11 12:10 AM, Mattia Rossi mro...@swin.edu.au wrote: On 14/09/2011 13:36, Brzozowski, John wrote: On 9/11/11 7:32 PM, Wouter Cloetenswouter.cloet...@softathome.com wrote: On 10/09/11 19:24, Brzozowski, John wrote: My IPv6 DNS is currently forwarding to my service providers recursive DNS servers or some other server on the Internet. My local IPv4 DNS server privately addressed and will forward for any request it is not authoritative for, which works fine. I am going to change the setup so that the RFC5006 DNS server IPv6 address and the IPv4 DNS server addresses are the same server. This server will have forwarding statements for the internal zones to the internal DNS server. I imagine this will iron things out. Alternatively if the IPv4 local DNS servers were also IPv6 transport enabled I could just use it, however, this is not the case. Indeed. This works fine in the setup I made for my company. Public lookups go upstream through my provider's IPv6 DNS server, local lookups go through the intranet's DNS server. Local lookups are defined as *.company.com and all the private IPv4 subnets. The IPv6 DNS server itself is authoritative for IPv6 until we merge the two some day. [jjmb] Interesting, certainly not the case for me. The resolver never tries a different DNS server once it gets responses from the IPv6. Just confirming, the DNS server (IPv6 transport) is authoritative for *.company.com right? If yes, this would explain why it works for you. Hmm, I've gone through this again, and it seems just weird to me, that once you're not able to resolve the names via IPv6, you're client is not falling back and trying the IPv4 DNS server, in case the one listed first in your client is the Ipv6 one. If the first one listed is the IPv4 one, you should be able to resolve the name immediately (via IPv4). [jjmb] the IPv6 DNS server addresses are listed first and tried first. Why would it try the others if there was not a failure? No data is an acceptable reply. Agree if the IPv4 addresses are listed first this would not be an issue, however, this is not how IPv6 behaves similar to how are preferred over A. On a side note: In FreeBSD they just recently implemented RFC5006/RFC6106 following the lines of OpenResolv. The cool thing it does on the client, is to set up different DNS servers for different domains, so in your case it would point to your local DNS if you want to resolve any *.company.com, and to the other DNS for everything else (with fallback to the local DNS eventually) Maybe we should push for that method to become standardised (if it hasn't been done yet). [jjmb] now this seems interesting, is this available for testing yet? Mat ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
Re: [homenet] Firewall (was: default LAN routing protocol for IPv6 CE router)
I generally agree with your comments below including the reference to UPnP. On 8/3/11 5:02 PM, Wouter Cloetens wouter.cloet...@softathome.com wrote: On 03/08/11 03:45, Brzozowski, John wrote: On 8/2/11 9:20 PM, Shane Amantesh...@castlepoint.net wrote: On Aug 2, 2011, at 5:08 PM, Brzozowski, John wrote: On 8/2/11 8:28 AM, Keith Mooremo...@network-heretics.com wrote: On Aug 2, 2011, at 4:22 AM, Philip Homburg wrote: The idea that a firewall should automatically know what it has to do strikes me as utterly bizarre. I realize that there's a desire to minimize the configuration burden for unsophisticated users (and agree with that), but the idea that the firewall knows better than the user what his security policy should be seems ridiculous. [jjmb] I agree Keith that having a firewall automatically know what to do is a tall order. I also think the is more than a desire to ease configuration burden, this is a must since most users on the Internet have very basic technical skills. [...] My take on firewalls is that devices, or more precisely software installed on devices, must request for services to be opened. UPnP IGDv2 is capable of doing this today for IPv6, just as UPnP IGDv1 does it for IPv4. I see no other way to make firewalling scalable (working for every service at every hop), sturdy (not fall over due to misconfiguration), and working without user interaction. And, we'd need to decide if this is something a device in the home can 'dynamically' request from the CPE-router/FW via, say, DHCPv6 or if there are better options ... Another interesting scenario where part of a delegated is interested or required to be firewalled while others not. I do not think we are limited ourselves. I think advanced users will still have the ability to do as they please and we are making sure not so advanced are not unknowingly exposed. As I mentioned earlier, I think there may be an opportunity for some protocol development in this space. I'm not a big fan of the UPnP protocol, but it already fills some of this space. Others could be considered, e.g. PCP. My take on this, and every single technical element in the scope of homenet's problem space, is that the challenge is symmetry: to make every protocol and delegation work upstream and downstream from every router. I would bet that every CPE router will contain a firewall. All available IPv4 CPE routers today do, and my customers all require the same for IPv6. UPnP IGDv2 (or another protocol) can be extended to allow opening all ports in all protocols for a prefix that is delegated to a downstream router, (or announced by a downstream router or whatever). So, thinking about our tall order here... Scenario 1: the downstream router implements its own firewall. The upstream router's firewall allows all traffic from and to that router to pass through, assuming the downstream router will handle it. Scenario 2: the downstream router does not implement its own firewall, or is not aware that the upstream router already implements a firewall, and relays firewall service requests to the upstream router. Scenario 3: the downstream router implements its own firewall. The upstream router's firewall, by policy, denies all traffic from and to that router, or, in the more likely SPI case, denies all new connections to that router's prefix. The downstream router must not only serve requests by hosts on its own downstream interface, but relay those requests to the upstream router. Scenario 3a: same as 3, but the downstream router starts by requesting to allow all traffic to and from its prefix to release the upstream router of the burden of firewalling, like in scenario 1. ... and more scenarios imaginable. Upstream and downstream capability detection is one challenge, so the right behaviour for the right scenario can be picked. All of this must be subject to override by policies set by the user or the provider. That's another challenge; the user must be able to determine at what level which policy makes his application fail. It all has to be secure. You don't want a malware agent to be able to pose as a downstream CPE router and punching a /64-size (or bigger) hole in the firewall. bfn, Wouter ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet ___ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
