Re: [homenet] Egress Routing Discussion: Baker model

On Fri, 22 Feb 2013, Ole Troan wrote: What about figure 2 of the Homenet Architecture? +---+---+ +---+---+ \ | Service | | Service | \ | Provider A | | Provider B | | Service |R

Re: [homenet] Egress Routing Discussion: Baker model

also inline On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 05:41:43PM +, Fred Baker (fred) wrote: > inline > > On Feb 23, 2013, at 12:48 AM, David Lamparter > wrote: > > For both "simple" and "full-blown" OSPFv3 the following loop/interop > > mechnisms come to my mind: > > > > 1. refusing adjacencies between SA

Re: [homenet] automatic prefix management (OSPF or ISIS version)

On Feb 22, 2013, at 06:16 , Michael Richardson wrote: > > If the ISP with the longest prefix is alive first, then the routers > pick subnet-id parts that fit into that. If that ISP has provided > enough subnets, then even when another ISP comes along, the "xx23" > part might remain stable for a

Re: [homenet] NPTv6-only home networks

On 22/02/13 19:48, Ted Lemon wrote: On Feb 22, 2013, at 10:53 AM, Simon Kelley wrote: The practice is that it always works, even a smartphone moving slowly into a dodgy Wifi network. If the client can get a DHPCv4 lease, the IPv6 SLAAC address gets a name too. That is _very_ cool. Nice work

Re: [homenet] NPTv6-only home networks

On Feb 22, 2013, at 10:53 AM, Simon Kelley wrote: > The practice is that it always works, even a smartphone moving slowly > into a dodgy Wifi network. If the client can get a DHPCv4 lease, the > IPv6 SLAAC address gets a name too. That is _very_ cool. Nice work! ___

Re: [homenet] Running code in Orlando

On Feb 22, 2013, at 10:37 AM, Michael Thomas wrote: > Is there any way to convince the powers that be that v6 address privacy is a > better/acceptable solution than > prefix-based privacy? Is there really anything that needs to be done for v6 > on that account other than just > switching on the,

Re: [homenet] NPTv6-only home networks

On Feb 22, 2013, at 10:01 AM, Michael Thomas wrote: > Right now, I don't think that sufficient energy is being given to just one > obvious problem: how does real DNS interact with > prefix delegation in the home (assuming that we don't want split horizon > dns)? For that matter, let me be even m

Re: [homenet] Running code in Orlando

On 2/21/13 5:06 PM, Lorenzo Colitti wrote: On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 1:35 AM, Dave Taht > 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 se

Re: [homenet] Egress Routing Discussion: Baker model

inline On Feb 23, 2013, at 12:48 AM, David Lamparter wrote: > For both "simple" and "full-blown" OSPFv3 the following loop/interop > mechnisms come to my mind: > > 1. refusing adjacencies between SADR and non-SADR routers. > Easily implemented with a Hello bit, this is the crowbar solution.

Re: [homenet] Next steps for draft-behringer-homenet-trust-bootstrap?

On Feb 13, 2013, at 3:55 PM, Michael Behringer (mbehring) wrote: > Homenet WG, > > In Atlanta we presented draft-behringer-homenet-trust-bootstrap-00, which > explains (high level) how trust could be bootstrapped in a homenet > environment. > > The feedback we got during the meeting was mos

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 t

Re: [homenet] automatic prefix management (OSPF or ISIS version)

On Feb 23, 2013, at 3:18 AM, Michael Richardson wrote: > Can you elaborate the scenario where a subnet-id renumbering would be > desireable, and would we want to actually signal this situation explicitly? There is a BAA (a request for a research proposal) from the US Air Force for a technolo

Re: [homenet] automatic prefix management (OSPF or ISIS version)

> "fred" == fred > writes: fred> If you would like I can change fred> This prefix is chosen at random, but may not collide with any fred> prefix currently advertised within the network and therefore fred> in the LSP database. fred> to read fred> In the absence of ot

Re: [homenet] automatic prefix management (OSPF or ISIS version)

On Feb 23, 2013, at 3:16 AM, Michael Richardson wrote: > >> "Lorenzo" == Lorenzo Colitti writes: >>> I.e. the "0123" is identical for the two prefixes? >>> > >Lorenzo> In the general case where the prefixes assigned by the >Lorenzo> operators are of different lengths, it cannot

Re: [homenet] NPTv6-only home networks

On 22/02/13 14:50, Ted Lemon wrote: > On Feb 22, 2013, at 8:24 AM, Simon Kelley wrote: >> It works as well for clients which do DHCPv4 and SLAAC. IPv6-only hosts >> would have to do stateful DHCPv6, but the DHCPv4 and SLAAC model covers >> an awful lot of currently-deployed clients. > > So dnsmas

Re: [homenet] NPTv6-only home networks

On 2/22/13 7:24 AM, Michael Thomas wrote: 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

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

Re: [homenet] Running code in Orlando

Ted Lemon wrote: On Feb 21, 2013, at 8:34 PM, Michael Thomas 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 t

Re: [homenet] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-homenet-arch-07

On 22 Feb 2013, at 15:15, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > I went through the draft, and noticed an instance of the word "hoemnet" in > section 2.4. > > Otherwise I think this is now in good shape for publication. Thanks Brian. The typos are there as I ran ispell on the .xml and forgot to re-run xm

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-on

Re: [homenet] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-homenet-arch-07

On 22 Feb 2013, at 15:15, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > I went through the draft, and noticed an instance of the word "hoemnet" in > section 2.4. > > Otherwise I think this is now in good shape for publication. Brian - thanks for the review! Working Group participants: I know Tim has had some

Re: [homenet] Egress Routing Discussion: Baker model

From: Lorenzo Colitti mailto:lore...@google.com>> Date: Thursday, February 21, 2013 5:41 PM To: Fred Baker mailto:f...@cisco.com>> Cc: "homenet@ietf.org Group" mailto:homenet@ietf.org>>, "Abhay Roy (akr)" mailto:a...@cisco.com>>, "isis-cha...@tools.ietf.org

Re: [homenet] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-homenet-arch-07

I went through the draft, and noticed an instance of the word "hoemnet" in section 2.4. Otherwise I think this is now in good shape for publication. Regards Brian On 12/02/2013 15:00, Ray Bellis wrote: > This email marks the commencement of Working Group Last Call for > draft-ietf-homenet-a

Re: [homenet] NPTv6-only home networks

Ted Lemon wrote: On Feb 21, 2013, at 11:31 PM, Lorenzo Colitti wrote: 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

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 pr

Re: [homenet] NPTv6-only home networks

On Feb 22, 2013, at 8:24 AM, Simon Kelley wrote: > It works as well for clients which do DHCPv4 and SLAAC. IPv6-only hosts > would have to do stateful DHCPv6, but the DHCPv4 and SLAAC model covers > an awful lot of currently-deployed clients. So dnsmasq is noticing that the IPv4 and IPv6 hosts ar

Re: [homenet] NPTv6-only home networks

On Feb 22, 2013, at 7:49 AM, Ray Bellis wrote: > I *really* don't like the idea of each individual Homenet having to create > some sort of randomised namespace for its internal DNS. I don't either, but that's not the only way to approach the problem. _

Re: [homenet] Running code in Orlando

On Feb 21, 2013, at 8:34 PM, Michael Thomas 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.

Re: [homenet] automatic prefix management (OSPF or ISIS version)

> "fred" == fred > writes: fred> my draft that if the autoconfig prefix is withdrawn, I expect fred> prefixes dependent on it to be withdrawn, and if stored in fred> permanent storage, erased. The implication is that if the same fred> prefix is then readvertised, there's a goo

Re: [homenet] automatic prefix management (OSPF or ISIS version)

> "Lorenzo" == Lorenzo Colitti writes: >> I.e. the "0123" is identical for the two prefixes? >> Lorenzo> In the general case where the prefixes assigned by the Lorenzo> operators are of different lengths, it cannot be. Right? True. If the ISP with the longest prefix is ali

Re: [homenet] Egress Routing Discussion: Baker model

> Ole Troan > 22 February 2013 14:06 > Ray, > > [...] > >>>2. Aren't we forgetting the first hop? >>> >>>Given a shared subnet/prefix/link with 2 CPE routers performing some >>>fancy new form of forwarding (based on PBR or SADR or whatever) >>>that is >>>

Re: [homenet] NPTv6-only home networks

On 22/02/13 13:07, David Lamparter wrote: > On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 01:00:48PM +, Simon Kelley wrote: >> On 22/02/13 12:30, Ted Lemon wrote: >>> On Feb 21, 2013, at 11:31 PM, Lorenzo Colitti >>> wrote: >> >>> I think the issue that Michael imagines NPTv6 will address is the >>> transition peri

Re: [homenet] Running code in Orlando

-Original Message- From: Michael Thomas Date: Thursday, February 21, 2013 5:57 PM To: Lorenzo Colitti Cc: Dave Taht , Michael Richardson , Mark Townsley , Jari Arkko , John Jason Brzozowski , "homenet@ietf.org Group" , David Lamparter Subject: Re: [homenet] Running code in Orlando >Lor

Re: [homenet] NPTv6-only home networks

On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 01:00:48PM +, Simon Kelley wrote: > On 22/02/13 12:30, Ted Lemon wrote: > > On Feb 21, 2013, at 11:31 PM, Lorenzo Colitti > > wrote: > > > I think the issue that Michael imagines NPTv6 will address is the > > transition period, when the washing machine has two IP addre

Re: [homenet] Egress Routing Discussion: Baker model

Ray, [...] >>2. Aren't we forgetting the first hop? >> >>Given a shared subnet/prefix/link with 2 CPE routers performing some >>fancy new form of forwarding (based on PBR or SADR or whatever) >>that is >>also shared by existing host implementations, how will the routers >>

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 _

Re: [homenet] Egress Routing Discussion: Baker model

> Lorenzo Colitti > 22 February 2013 11:17 > On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 6:52 PM, Ray Hunter > wrote: > > But given that route determination is a distributed algorithm, and > that > Homenet devices will not always run the latest and grea

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 > 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 address

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 ==

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.comca

Re: [homenet] NPTv6-only home networks

On 22 Feb 2013, at 12:37, Ted Lemon wrote: > Er, that came out wrong. I'm agreeing with "want to be able to access > devices in the home from away," not "working group was chartered in the last > century." :) > I am also skeptical about MDNS as a solution, though. Personally, I think

Re: [homenet] NPTv6-only home networks

On 22 Feb 2013, at 03:45, Michael Thomas 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

Re: [homenet] NPTv6-only home networks

On Feb 22, 2013, at 7:27 AM, Ted Lemon 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 as

Re: [homenet] NPTv6-only home networks

On Feb 21, 2013, at 11:31 PM, Lorenzo Colitti wrote: > 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 a

Re: [homenet] NPTv6-only home networks

On Feb 21, 2013, at 10:45 PM, Michael Thomas 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 a

Re: [homenet] Egress Routing Discussion: Baker model

On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 07:17:04PM +0900, Lorenzo Colitti wrote: > On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 6:52 PM, Ray Hunter wrote: > > > But given that route determination is a distributed algorithm, and that > > Homenet devices will not always run the latest and greatest code, > > what action should nodes th

Re: [homenet] Egress Routing Discussion

Fred, > Ole Troan and Lorenzo Colitti documented their model, which is strictly > egress routing based on the OSPF AS-prefix-LSA and the assumption of > automated prefix allocation. This is not multi-topology; it in effect tags > the default route advertised as a route from an alternate univers

Re: [homenet] Egress Routing Discussion: Baker model

On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 6:52 PM, Ray Hunter wrote: > But given that route determination is a distributed algorithm, and that > Homenet devices will not always run the latest and greatest code, > what action should nodes that are running older code take regarding any > TLV options that they don't

Re: [homenet] Egress Routing Discussion: Baker model

I have read all of your drafts, and those of the other authors, carefully, once. No doubt I'll have to re-read them. This response is limited to high level comments regarding the overall approach, and isprobably applicable to all 3 sets of authors : 1. Some drafts talk extensively about the need

Re: [homenet] Egress Routing Discussion: Baker model

On 21/02/2013 19:23, Fred Baker (fred) wrote: ... >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-baker-ipv6-isis-dst-flowlabel-routing >> "Using IS-IS with Role-Based Access Control", Fred Baker, 17-Feb-13 >> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-baker-ipv6-isis-dst-src-routing >> "IPv6 Source/Destination Rou

Re: [homenet] NPTv6-only home networks

On 22/02/2013 03:45, Michael Thomas wrote: ... > Well, if one of the requirements is that I be able to control my washing > machine from across the continent, Actually we need to be clear about that requirement. There are at least three cases I can imagine: 1. I want to control my washing machine

Re: [homenet] Egress Routing Discussion: Baker model

On 22 Feb 2013, at 03:04, David Lamparter wrote: > - BIRD seems to be interested in adding IS-IS due to interest from SPs. > A branch exists, but not much progress has been made: > > [https://redmine.labs.nic.cz/projects/bird/repository?utf8=%E2%9C%93&rev=isis] Ondrej Filip tells me that thi

Re: [homenet] automatic prefix management (OSPF or ISIS version)

On 22/02/2013 04:50, Fred Baker (fred) wrote: > On Feb 22, 2013, at 1:54 PM, Michael Richardson > wrote: > >> For a network where there is more than one ISP, is it >> acceptable for a CPE that has decided that it is >> PREFIX1:0123::/64, to "randomly" decide to be >> PREFIX2:0123::/64? > > I don

Re: [homenet] NPTv6-only home networks

On 2/21/13 7:04 PM, Michael Thomas wrote: Lorenzo Colitti wrote: On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 10:57 AM, Michael Thomas > wrote: 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 whet