From nobody Fri Aug 1 03:44:43 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 641EA1A0A74 for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 03:44:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id D8gJGZ1Spa6r for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 03:44:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from banjo.employees.org (banjo.employees.org [198.137.202.19]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A9241A0A3B for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 03:44:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dhcp-10-61-109-37.cisco.com (173-38-208-169.cisco.com [173.38.208.169]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: otroan) by banjo.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AC4C461A1; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 03:44:35 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_7178E6E0-167F-4869-A40A-1D73364AD32D"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) From: Ole Troan In-Reply-To: <53DB311D.4030902@bogus.com> Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2014 12:44:34 +0200 Message-Id: <7FCC2AC1-A6DE-4469-A868-CD87B5DC6C49@employees.org> References: <72E20441-9EE0-4A61-B127-BA96468B6E5F@gmail.com> <711FCA01-1990-4B49-8571-BBBD6BCC280B@fugue.com> <9402.1406865814@sandelman.ca> <53DB311D.4030902@bogus.com> To: joel jaeggli X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/H0buvi6NZCBleR2E3fP6eFhMUCA Cc: Michael Richardson , homenet@ietf.org, Ted Lemon , RJ Atkinson Subject: Re: [homenet] Clarification on Routing Thoughts X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2014 10:44:42 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_7178E6E0-167F-4869-A40A-1D73364AD32D Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 >>> It seems to me that you are grasping for a use case to justify a split >>> where none is needed. Protocols like OSPF, IS-IS and Babel would all >>> work in both environments. RIP won't. So this seems more like an >>> argument not to use RIP than an argument to have two different homenet >>> router profiles. >> >> For the record, can you expound on the technical reason why RIP(v2) won't >> work? (I'm not a fan of it, but last time I used it was on SunOS 3 or >> something) > > hop count isn't a great tool for expressing that your gig-e port is a > more desireable path if up then the wifi interface. > the cost/metric is perfectly fine for that. assuming a relatively small network diameter. cheers, Ole --Apple-Mail=_7178E6E0-167F-4869-A40A-1D73364AD32D Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJT22+SAAoJEFuJXizso86gdEMH/ijSg9u5tsf72NE722sDo+Yr BKvTVal3sF66Ngi4HpKxKNWpzc5ykSpFzL4cDyWkaoDvokqOq46ZE9Dnq3zIrrPt YAro4zVBbQW1njU0/NSieQBkVYEqDekhCETdvB+LkXkr2xXKA7VFZsrNl106pwQq s/VE4ydxls/DSL8EtJOgJcX4r/JPSruqnAcKsObPBFOu5KASeHBlPJliKXveLNUb wdgn0mK1WUiFgzqjZ2GTIRNbd07Uums1doUI4xtEygKph/+jwMTiD8tNPUVDOpbL cdiyJ0I9UH/0euGihlPZse41faURXElj9E/vTV2y9bUZmjjf7uRQTsRqVAPRCdk= =nxAE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_7178E6E0-167F-4869-A40A-1D73364AD32D-- From nobody Fri Aug 1 04:28:23 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01B561A0A9B for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 04:28:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.983 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.983 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fW5Q4fZlMthX for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 04:28:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from oxalide-out.extra.cea.fr (oxalide-out.extra.cea.fr [132.168.224.8]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 810781A0A9A for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 04:28:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by oxalide.extra.cea.fr (8.14.2/8.14.2/CEAnet-Internet-out-2.3) with ESMTP id s71BSHmq029379 for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 13:28:17 +0200 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id BDC7E203C92 for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 13:31:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from muguet1.intra.cea.fr (muguet1.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.6]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC02E203BDC for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 13:31:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (is010446-4.intra.cea.fr [10.8.33.116]) by muguet1.intra.cea.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8/CEAnet-Intranet-out-1.2) with ESMTP id s71BS0mk002153 for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 13:28:17 +0200 Message-ID: <53DB79C0.1060204@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2014 13:28:00 +0200 From: Alexandru Petrescu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: homenet@ietf.org References: <72E20441-9EE0-4A61-B127-BA96468B6E5F@gmail.com> <711FCA01-1990-4B49-8571-BBBD6BCC280B@fugue.com> <9402.1406865814@sandelman.ca> <53DB311D.4030902@bogus.com> <7FCC2AC1-A6DE-4469-A868-CD87B5DC6C49@employees.org> In-Reply-To: <7FCC2AC1-A6DE-4469-A868-CD87B5DC6C49@employees.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/_V-_lAQrL_v78LAlghI6N7HcQU0 Subject: Re: [homenet] Clarification on Routing Thoughts X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2014 11:28:22 -0000 Le 01/08/2014 12:44, Ole Troan a écrit : >>>> It seems to me that you are grasping for a use case to justify a split >>>> where none is needed. Protocols like OSPF, IS-IS and Babel would all >>>> work in both environments. RIP won't. So this seems more like an >>>> argument not to use RIP than an argument to have two different homenet >>>> router profiles. >>> >>> For the record, can you expound on the technical reason why RIP(v2) won't >>> work? (I'm not a fan of it, but last time I used it was on SunOS 3 or >>> something) >> >> hop count isn't a great tool for expressing that your gig-e port is a >> more desireable path if up then the wifi interface. >> > > the cost/metric is perfectly fine for that. > assuming a relatively small network diameter. I think Joël's reluctance about hopcount qualifying the gig-e/wifi choice may change if considering wifi-ac instead. I.e. hopcount may be good to qualify a choice between Gigabit Ethernet and Gigabit wifi. Alex > > cheers, > Ole > > > > _______________________________________________ > homenet mailing list > homenet@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet > From nobody Fri Aug 1 04:33:03 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E18B81A0A99 for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 04:33:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LnCxPvxBKXcC for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 04:33:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qa0-x232.google.com (mail-qa0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c00::232]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5BBC81A0A9B for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 04:33:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qa0-f50.google.com with SMTP id s7so3788683qap.9 for ; Fri, 01 Aug 2014 04:32:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ix7IGzjHu/sXLL3LbM8mx14t/HVN75TOxoJ/yT5rwYI=; b=Es6tAYRxZm8Q5C4ewFgNhtoOtYHA5p+6RgmTLm1DuFXLX7VGEwn2C5Bhu6qUXpS4k+ QCoG9KdTscHc5LLA2Jz25pduxMvjIR96A68ChF7HcJWKeDVrjsaQEC6ZrkkaKJx3uJtk 9Xy59yFR9ytKs+PklUjEtsV6M6LqOUjVl3HF8+QxcQlFVIPb++7RCVIGjWGqLaQodUlz laZe1gCEyXyrA6DojP6Zes642qcT857a2b8BHK4coFtPF5UyvoyR0b1BGvV4Iu3DdVol QPIAJRnMHoEfITrco/J7GmbLQTt4x2QaOIarqvGqs7IUoH3/HFQ9nW5jyBDKe/ixCgke dBMw== X-Received: by 10.229.171.196 with SMTP id i4mr7977259qcz.15.1406892779408; Fri, 01 Aug 2014 04:32:59 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.224.44.18 with HTTP; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 04:32:39 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <53DB79C0.1060204@gmail.com> References: <72E20441-9EE0-4A61-B127-BA96468B6E5F@gmail.com> <711FCA01-1990-4B49-8571-BBBD6BCC280B@fugue.com> <9402.1406865814@sandelman.ca> <53DB311D.4030902@bogus.com> <7FCC2AC1-A6DE-4469-A868-CD87B5DC6C49@employees.org> <53DB79C0.1060204@gmail.com> From: Henning Rogge Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2014 13:32:39 +0200 Message-ID: To: Alexandru Petrescu Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/W0TdfCEV_csvnJl60r6nh5lfY7Q Cc: "homenet@ietf.org Group" Subject: Re: [homenet] Clarification on Routing Thoughts X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2014 11:33:02 -0000 > I think Jo=C3=ABl's reluctance about hopcount qualifying the gig-e/wifi > choice may change if considering wifi-ac instead. I.e. hopcount may be > good to qualify a choice between Gigabit Ethernet and Gigabit wifi. Measuring any kind of wifi connection just with "hopcount" is not a good idea. Even 802.11ac will downgrade to a few Mbit/s if the connection is bad. Henning Rogge From nobody Fri Aug 1 06:13:00 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D11EE1A02DE for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 06:12:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.502 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.502 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yYsLZH1wL6Dz for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 06:12:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alln-iport-4.cisco.com (alln-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.142.91]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 621601A0407 for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 06:12:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1786; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1406898775; x=1408108375; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=VyOTASJKuu2yd5SBTYw2Mt7bD8QkSP7WT2FxMq0OKt0=; b=hLdxiBbzbEjJ2v4ltWwMk5jdhEo7oi01ZdYv5gn/I3v5Cq7uCVtuZP0B XO6zGuIwXVXcP34S0b2Hb/6y3lynHtif2NIcsdZ+neyWNdXn0j9XKTOOz 4748gY+pMGhS6mwOfQqTYobz6bWDldsRFHyjkr2z/T9Kt1KeBRJR3+Xw6 Q=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AiEFALSR21OtJA2E/2dsb2JhbABbgw1SVwTLfwqGeVMBgQgWd4QEAQEEAQEBawsQAgEIEgYuJwsXDgIEAQ0FG4gnDcluEwSPGTMHhEsFik6RLJRag0lsgUU X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.01,780,1400025600"; d="scan'208";a="65782204" Received: from alln-core-10.cisco.com ([173.36.13.132]) by alln-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 01 Aug 2014 13:12:55 +0000 Received: from xhc-aln-x05.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x05.cisco.com [173.36.12.79]) by alln-core-10.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s71DCsJ3019906 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Fri, 1 Aug 2014 13:12:54 GMT Received: from xmb-aln-x06.cisco.com ([169.254.1.69]) by xhc-aln-x05.cisco.com ([173.36.12.79]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 08:12:54 -0500 From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" To: Markus Stenberg , Michael Richardson Thread-Topic: [homenet] Clarification on Routing Thoughts Thread-Index: AQHPqCMNGbz28D9JvkCusZeQguIMBpuxVU0AgAopXgCAACNzAIAAMvsA Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2014 13:12:53 +0000 Message-ID: References: <72E20441-9EE0-4A61-B127-BA96468B6E5F@gmail.com> <711FCA01-1990-4B49-8571-BBBD6BCC280B@fugue.com> <9402.1406865814@sandelman.ca> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.116.152.195] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-ID: <5B0557DEC51ABD408559738DBCD264C9@emea.cisco.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/gmw0ZrHy4EeR_FgwHeUGa1Xo1Ks Cc: Ted Lemon , "homenet@ietf.org" , RJ Atkinson Subject: Re: [homenet] Clarification on Routing Thoughts X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2014 13:12:58 -0000 On 8/1/14, 2:10 AM, "Markus Stenberg" wrote: >On 1.8.2014, at 4.03, Michael Richardson wrote: >> Ted Lemon wrote: >>> It seems to me that you are grasping for a use case to justify a split >>> where none is needed. Protocols like OSPF, IS-IS and Babel would all >>> work in both environments. RIP won't. So this seems more like an >>> argument not to use RIP than an argument to have two different homenet >>> router profiles. >> For the record, can you expound on the technical reason why RIP(v2) >>won't >> work? (I'm not a fan of it, but last time I used it was on SunOS 3 or >> something) > >RIPng (RFC2080) isn=B9t source specific, I=B9m not sure if there=B9s somet= hing >more recent on RIP front that is (and is widely implemented available). >Obviously, extending RIPng to be source specific would not be hard, but >then it wouldn=B9t be RIP anymore by strict definition (no existing >implementations). Given the current RIPng standard timers, it could also be argued that RIPng, as specified, doesn=B9t meet the convergence requirements. Here is a= n excerpt from section 3.5.1 of "IPv6 Home Networking Architecture Principles=B2:=20 Minimising convergence time should be a goal in any routed environment. It is reasonable to assume that convergence time should not be significantly longer than network outages users are accustomed to should their CER reboot. There is the imperfect solutions to the =B3counting to infinity=B2 problem = in Ring.=20 Thanks, Acee=20 > >Cheers, > >-Markus > >_______________________________________________ >homenet mailing list >homenet@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet From nobody Fri Aug 1 09:47:23 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DACA1B282A for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 09:47:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.549 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.549 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FEslnkzuH8AQ for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 09:47:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D1531B2828 for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 09:47:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:1]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/46573) with ESMTP id s71Gl8YP024036 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 18:47:09 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay2/46573) with ESMTP id s71Gl8OV013666 for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 18:47:08 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id C11EA2C727F for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 18:47:08 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id EW4EzkqWrBs5 for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 18:47:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ijon.pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A94742C727B for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 18:47:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from jch (uid 1000) (envelope-from jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr) id c001d4 by ijon.pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr (DragonFly Mail Agent v0.9); Fri, 01 Aug 2014 18:47:15 +0200 Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2014 18:47:15 +0200 Message-ID: <87r41088do.wl-jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: "Acee Lindem \(acee\)" In-Reply-To: References: <72E20441-9EE0-4A61-B127-BA96468B6E5F@gmail.com> <711FCA01-1990-4B49-8571-BBBD6BCC280B@fugue.com> <9402.1406865814@sandelman.ca> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]); Fri, 01 Aug 2014 18:47:09 +0200 (CEST) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.141]); Fri, 01 Aug 2014 18:47:08 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 53DBC48C.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-Miltered: at potemkin with ID 53DBC48C.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 53DBC48C.001 from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/null/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 53DBC48C.001 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 53DBC48C.001 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 53DBC48C.001 on potemkin.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/OmpAUN61tbU3yVvLtPd3bmHCYFk Cc: "homenet@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [homenet] Clarification on Routing Thoughts X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2014 16:47:17 -0000 > Given the current RIPng standard timers, it could also be argued that > RIPng, as specified, doesn't meet the convergence requirements. > Minimising convergence time should be a goal in any routed > environment. It is reasonable to assume that convergence time should > not be significantly longer than network outages users are accustomed > to should their CER reboot. Detecting a dead router in the absence of an explicit retraction takes one minute, worst case, 45 seconds average. After that, convergence happens in 30 seconds, worst case, if you're using triggered updates. Assuming you're also doing split horizon, typical convergence times are on the order of 4 seconds in many reasonable topologies. (Note that Quagga's RIPng doesn't implement triggered updates, please don't use it for testing.) So we're speaking of 90 seconds worst case -- including the time needed for virtual link sensing --, and roughly 55 seconds average convergence times, with the default timers. (Note that the biggest part of this figure is due to the slow virtual link sensing -- counting to infinity is not the main flaw of RIPng, contrary to common perception.) That's abysmally slow when compared with OSPF, but way less than the time needed for an ADSL modem to reboot and establish ADSL sync. I'm not sure we should be promoting RIPng at this stage, Acee, but neither should we disqualify it outright. If somebody comes out with strong arguments in favour of RIPng, we should be keeping an open mind. -- Juliusz (who is looking forward to implementing the source-sensitive extensions to RIPng) From nobody Fri Aug 1 10:35:30 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE8501B2876 for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 10:35:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.502 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.502 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TlenYWTbGnHK for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 10:35:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alln-iport-4.cisco.com (alln-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.142.91]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 881E81B2849 for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 10:35:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1887; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1406914525; x=1408124125; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=K0LrY3e9oZgQ+KVNRE2IEH0ftszpKSfo+GG9Aki0Yns=; b=FamdPFBhMI3/2cYn3TQZV7jCcqJZra9pldyCenq/kjaZ4Qd6zSmnRlCV R6CyWLjtFVQw5THpXu0ZAiG8yncKTEMMoBF9kNiciZUj1F2+FmD4PiAYm 9fnqnGc/7fhiYcTpQXxDYUK/193Bi8HW37E//2R//Rx1kZeVcMd+tuhxd w=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AmgFALLO21OtJV2P/2dsb2JhbABbgw2BKQTLMogpAYELFneEBAEBAwF0BRACAQgOODIlAgQOBYg6CMl0F49MB4RLBYpOjQGEK5Rag0lsgUU X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.01,781,1400025600"; d="scan'208";a="65850006" Received: from rcdn-core-7.cisco.com ([173.37.93.143]) by alln-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 01 Aug 2014 17:35:24 +0000 Received: from xhc-aln-x14.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x14.cisco.com [173.36.12.88]) by rcdn-core-7.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s71HZN3s022972 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Fri, 1 Aug 2014 17:35:24 GMT Received: from xmb-aln-x06.cisco.com ([169.254.1.69]) by xhc-aln-x14.cisco.com ([173.36.12.88]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 12:35:23 -0500 From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" To: Juliusz Chroboczek Thread-Topic: [homenet] Clarification on Routing Thoughts Thread-Index: AQHPqCMNGbz28D9JvkCusZeQguIMBpuxVU0AgAopXgCAACNzAIAAMvsAgAB+8YD//8pkAA== Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2014 17:35:23 +0000 Message-ID: References: <72E20441-9EE0-4A61-B127-BA96468B6E5F@gmail.com> <711FCA01-1990-4B49-8571-BBBD6BCC280B@fugue.com> <9402.1406865814@sandelman.ca> <87r41088do.wl-jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr> In-Reply-To: <87r41088do.wl-jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.116.152.195] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/dSn9Itub-C-bDE0ffESPdjEXqYo Cc: "homenet@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [homenet] Clarification on Routing Thoughts X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2014 17:35:28 -0000 On 8/1/14, 12:47 PM, "Juliusz Chroboczek" wrote: >> Given the current RIPng standard timers, it could also be argued that >> RIPng, as specified, doesn't meet the convergence requirements. > >> Minimising convergence time should be a goal in any routed >> environment. It is reasonable to assume that convergence time should >> not be significantly longer than network outages users are accustomed >> to should their CER reboot. > >Detecting a dead router in the absence of an explicit retraction takes one >minute, worst case, 45 seconds average. After that, convergence happens >in 30 seconds, worst case, if you're using triggered updates. Assuming >you're also doing split horizon, typical convergence times are on the >order of 4 seconds in many reasonable topologies. (Note that Quagga's >RIPng doesn't implement triggered updates, please don't use it for >testing.) > >So we're speaking of 90 seconds worst case -- including the time needed >for virtual link sensing --, and roughly 55 seconds average convergence >times, with the default timers. (Note that the biggest part of this >figure is due to the slow virtual link sensing -- counting to infinity is >not the main flaw of RIPng, contrary to common perception.) > >That's abysmally slow when compared with OSPF, but way less than the time >needed for an ADSL modem to reboot and establish ADSL sync. I'm not sure >we should be promoting RIPng at this stage, Acee, but neither should we >disqualify it outright. If somebody comes out with strong arguments in >favour of RIPng, we should be keeping an open mind. I=B9m fine as long as the consensus of the WG is that it meets the requirements.=20 Thanks, Acee=20 > >-- Juliusz (who is looking forward to implementing the source-sensitive > extensions to RIPng) From nobody Sat Aug 2 13:00:23 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01DC41B2982 for ; Sat, 2 Aug 2014 13:00:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0fwZIGrLsL-W for ; Sat, 2 Aug 2014 12:59:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::81]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A56081B2983 for ; Sat, 2 Aug 2014 12:59:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mb-aye.local (c-67-188-0-113.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [67.188.0.113]) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id s72JxrfF005891 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Sat, 2 Aug 2014 19:59:53 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com) Message-ID: <53DD4332.9020107@bogus.com> Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2014 12:59:46 -0700 From: joel jaeggli User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Henning Rogge , Alexandru Petrescu References: <72E20441-9EE0-4A61-B127-BA96468B6E5F@gmail.com> <711FCA01-1990-4B49-8571-BBBD6BCC280B@fugue.com> <9402.1406865814@sandelman.ca> <53DB311D.4030902@bogus.com> <7FCC2AC1-A6DE-4469-A868-CD87B5DC6C49@employees.org> <53DB79C0.1060204@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="mFkDpvOM1cVg58ksDffDJqCvHvWencHD8" X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (nagasaki.bogus.com [147.28.0.81]); Sat, 02 Aug 2014 19:59:54 +0000 (UTC) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/v2Zkk4kngQA73jcOCUrTqigl33U Cc: "homenet@ietf.org Group" Subject: Re: [homenet] Clarification on Routing Thoughts X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2014 20:00:17 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --mFkDpvOM1cVg58ksDffDJqCvHvWencHD8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 8/1/14 4:32 AM, Henning Rogge wrote: >> I think Jo=C3=ABl's reluctance about hopcount qualifying the gig-e/wif= i >> choice may change if considering wifi-ac instead. I.e. hopcount may be= >> good to qualify a choice between Gigabit Ethernet and Gigabit wifi. >=20 > Measuring any kind of wifi connection just with "hopcount" is not a > good idea. Even 802.11ac will downgrade to a few Mbit/s if the > connection is bad. The more germain point is if there are heterogeneous link layers available in a routed topology some signaling to indicate which is a the most desirable path (cost) is on order. just because two device are connected via the zigbee network doesn't mean they should use it as a communications path if they are also connected via wifi or ethernet. > Henning Rogge >=20 > _______________________________________________ > homenet mailing list > homenet@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet >=20 --mFkDpvOM1cVg58ksDffDJqCvHvWencHD8 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlPdQzIACgkQ8AA1q7Z/VrJd/gCfRqrEZj13w4+lYCbwYqRiK//2 D4AAnikEwMmY01URtB+2CsMx1db1xyJS =0ApA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --mFkDpvOM1cVg58ksDffDJqCvHvWencHD8-- From nobody Thu Aug 7 04:07:36 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B043E1B2A74 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2014 04:07:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.401 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.401 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MBPMdaPhLwEG for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2014 04:07:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx2.nominet.org.uk (mail.nominet.org.uk [213.248.242.49]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 053531B2A6D for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2014 04:07:22 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: s=main2.dk.nominet.selector; d=nominet.org.uk; c=nofws; q=dns; h=X-IronPort-AV:X-IPAS-Result:Received:Received:From:To: Subject:Thread-Topic:Thread-Index:Date:Message-ID: Accept-Language:Content-Language:X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:x-originating-ip:Content-Type: MIME-Version; b=lx0flrOtYjc44t/eoUTNNW1c598kccQoMG/4wn5gSmpSLJ8JJvjz80fh XaSHFg5fze6mRkK0/+vZGuFcYJPPNG/fI2mP+hGr36fORs1ZwQZgGaPjA m13aRNfrMpFOxiWFXrXXWrvdgd9aRGAIy5YaLKeCKbHnapSqsEab1qiL7 adL0z7K6H6RUwj9hn0u0TF9gQrFgYqmVRVdEuE98nJJUC/n8HVrXkE6u1 uZBIYKa8vDxij6N+MfW2Fs+4Ikw25; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nominet.org.uk; i=@nominet.org.uk; q=dns/txt; s=main2.dkim.nominet.selector; t=1407409643; x=1438945643; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=yKuVJcPtrvV7JHg6XCdM/uyBdZDQSJ4nDH+5TqybspY=; b=NZArY8fgLepMgXZe+Ov9pwR9C7Am7YXCYTk3XqKyI8o4/fuVfkkmtHkR ameqXiYeE2zz8DBEr24/CVGAowQUmG7bIgQ/npoaewaRtrXxz5esCc1oR RGGbVcfhcN/o9o6NGmaBkpaKn+aRhJ00gO7fohC9E6D8PDdL5gnp+J6V4 AZbyBwrc3u2TV8wnqzZL+NEXP/wS9+LGIOr99KpWGl9obnhleAYC7hXNq zhxhguN60A5Rq/F6HB0VqrDGesGS8; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="5.01,817,1400022000"; d="scan'208,217"; a="11387126" X-IPAS-Result: AuMQACxd41PV+MWRdGdsb2JhbABagmp1WAOxbZkQgS8VBQEJiF8WEAEMWoN6EFM4AQsBdCcEHIg6AwmeDaVxF5ILD0QkgRwFtFyCMg Received: from wds-exc2.okna.nominet.org.uk ([213.248.197.145]) by mx2.nominet.org.uk with ESMTP; 07 Aug 2014 12:07:20 +0100 Received: from WDS-EXC1.okna.nominet.org.uk ([fe80::1593:1394:a91f:8f5f]) by wds-exc2.okna.nominet.org.uk ([fe80::7577:eaca:5241:25d4%16]) with mapi id 14.03.0181.006; Thu, 7 Aug 2014 12:07:20 +0100 From: Ray Bellis To: "homenet@ietf.org Group" Thread-Topic: IETF 90 WG Minutes Thread-Index: AQHPsi/B6vOMKBWKy0mu+DmO5XzLYg== Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2014 11:07:19 +0000 Message-ID: <1FDE0780-680C-481C-A34F-C638AA38A950@nominet.org.uk> Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [192.168.2.1] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_1FDE0780680C481CA34FC638AA38A950nominetorguk_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/xoMvuoYL2kTmgey3M-BPcVn5CkI Subject: [homenet] IETF 90 WG Minutes X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2014 11:07:25 -0000 --_000_1FDE0780680C481CA34FC638AA38A950nominetorguk_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thomas's excellent transcript minutes of the WG session in Toronto are now = online at: If you have any corrections please submit them to the Chairs by Friday 29th= August. thanks, Ray --_000_1FDE0780680C481CA34FC638AA38A950nominetorguk_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <3242D66EBDF8A24D960C491E2F4969E3@okna.nominet.org.uk> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thomas's excellent transcript minutes of the WG session in Toronto are now = online at:


If you have any corrections please submit them to the Chairs by Friday= 29th August.

thanks,

Ray

--_000_1FDE0780680C481CA34FC638AA38A950nominetorguk_-- From mardemes@gmail.com Sun Aug 24 11:41:22 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CA001A066B for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2014 11:41:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XAy1DaqYVAYC for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2014 11:41:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yh0-x22f.google.com (mail-yh0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c01::22f]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4BF571A066A for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2014 11:41:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yh0-f47.google.com with SMTP id f10so10276074yha.34 for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2014 11:41:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=SrThnhi8l5pu1F5bS07YAsZu3M0i3FhbTIhGKnSccks=; b=lEjhLUQTfzQvQYgi2LP7hO8PT/8/iHxqt2ACL95IPtvPLGXpTuvXsJokSq7gtX6F1g 2T33InWAFAurFnuK1+jiR2JtEESlhgsEQ5HAMPHSspdgVtxhzQV0kO6ng9D+3LRu9EuQ m8wniFUFc1RBSc+4HxlXF4sFT5E+nIk5h0T8YJRhdiW3ovk09rcVwmqU8QLNQcXox8/o oazjQ9AXSLM1Aeu1NXXLlak8kkMgnEzHP/xEZXM8aANZ5wDur6k3X1d+P6gIe0TRc+aH j2folLwO9EK7uyyc/109MNJrOwcmf1yGhHEFUCNhezfktZfmMYY0SDw7HGmhyzvt69AF g9KQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.236.148.112 with SMTP id u76mr27568374yhj.22.1408905680651; Sun, 24 Aug 2014 11:41:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.170.149.5 with HTTP; Sun, 24 Aug 2014 11:41:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2014 15:41:20 -0300 Message-ID: From: Martony Demes To: homenet@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf303a31079e0c900501646a14 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/7lJNzXVdpfRsO-rc1nDg-dZgqMI Subject: [homenet] Participation in group X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2014 18:45:38 -0000 --20cf303a31079e0c900501646a14 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello, I want participation in group homenet! --=20 * Martony Demes* * Analista de Tecnologia da Informa=C3=A7=C3=A3o * * 86 9990-9064 [WhatsApp]* * http://mardemes.com * --20cf303a31079e0c900501646a14 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello,=C2=A0
= =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0I want participation in group homenet!

--
= =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Martony Demes
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Analista de Tecnologia da= =C2=A0Informa=C3=A7=C3=A3o=C2=A0
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A086 9990-9064 [WhatsApp]
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0=C2= =A0http://mardemes.com=C2=A0


=C2=A0


--20cf303a31079e0c900501646a14-- From nobody Thu Aug 28 00:42:56 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C78C1A06F6 for ; Thu, 28 Aug 2014 00:42:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.201 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CY53Plzt5xat for ; Thu, 28 Aug 2014 00:42:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pa0-f46.google.com (mail-pa0-f46.google.com [209.85.220.46]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 54E6F1A06E3 for ; Thu, 28 Aug 2014 00:42:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pa0-f46.google.com with SMTP id eu11so1454693pac.19 for ; Thu, 28 Aug 2014 00:42:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:content-type:subject:message-id:date:to :mime-version; bh=WFuBW7HEKRL8e1rrffzkmdrFJuSlugMuTQk3cBdyh7E=; b=OWFIp+HkoidNmu/HiGkhDGrFEaurUW/hW3y7FgrljYq7YKACftON2asQPGdnxOhq1N t1lf98nprhCsLtay2mBDvSmTKq3MezLYqD0lUhGhdnFNcUY4ux4ygRIo8h2WN07kNxZr tUZt2xxO/t7vjyV0UJJNT0n9NT/UV5MSogznRzv1upAgud3MJV4NFhu6gPfTrcJYrj4X bAsw+ZB2IBBbmN3ZUPqPL0qocNqGUDlcEcS1mH9h5UAAA8uDBDOV484NlQ5qBF0FfKou GOubOt83aiUAcrCMql7ESg2CJvolQ+gdwI2MJn4vzJgK/TyCYvoXjwb9s9Pqtq+l0BbD EORQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmLGprBh2xSy7Ic2or4L38zfS0UJI/7bF5+h8mOOgmdQFrNxJg38ITIyWuSFGXK3vMjicB1 X-Received: by 10.66.156.72 with SMTP id wc8mr3049646pab.23.1409211760330; Thu, 28 Aug 2014 00:42:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2001:470:113:101:7042:3d3a:9528:e181? ([2001:470:113:101:7042:3d3a:9528:e181]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id gr5sm2672475pbc.33.2014.08.28.00.42.39 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 28 Aug 2014 00:42:39 -0700 (PDT) From: Martin Winter Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_97C22262-ACB1-4955-9B73-87212A8415D1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 Message-Id: <10133FC9-55FD-4402-A992-935F58D0344F@netdef.org> Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 00:42:37 -0700 To: homenet@ietf.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/sg8X-pL3i6d7mKgo_wMypNRJ3ew Subject: [homenet] IETF 89 Homenet with ISIS Autoconf / Src-Dest Routing published X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 07:42:48 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_97C22262-ACB1-4955-9B73-87212A8415D1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Hi everyone, We at NetDEF are proud to announce that the proof-of-concept code for = the Homenet with ISIS Autoconf and SrcDest routing is now available. This is the code which we demo=92d at the IETF 89 in Toronto as part of = the Bits=92n=92Bytes. There are in essence 4 essential GIT repositories: https://git.netdef.org/projects/OSR/repos/isis ISIS source code.=20 If you want to build ISIS code on a generic Linux System (not = part of OpenWRT), then use this git.=20 We added detailed build instructions for Ubuntu 14.04LTS and = some ISIS command help in the Doc directory in this repo https://git.netdef.org/projects/OSR/repos/openwrt-buildroot Complete OpenWRT build root with the Homenet/ISIS code = integrated.=20 If you want to build a OpenWRT system, then use this git.=20 Also includes some example configs to assist building the = OpenWRT on various platforms (Intel, ASUS RT-16N, TP-Link Archer C7 V2). For details and help on getting started see README the = build-helpers/ Directory in this git https://git.netdef.org/projects/OSR/repos/openwrt-isis-hnet OpenWRT feed for the Homenet ISIS code.=20 If you want to integrate the Homenet ISIS code into a different = OpenWRT buildroot, then use this git which is the isis feed for OpenWRT https://git.netdef.org/projects/OSR/repos/srcdest Quagga with SrcDest modification. The official Quagga doesn=92t contain (yet) the required changes = for Src-Dest. This should be done soon and we=92ll change over our git at that time The fastest way to get started is to clone the openwrt-buildroot git = which includes the complete OpenWRT with Homenet and our ISIS code. There are example build configs with this code for ASUS RT-N16, TP-LINK = Archer C7 (V2), Intel KVM (32 & 64bit), and Soekris Net4801 and Net5501 In general, we believe that the current proof-of-concept code should = work on all barrier breaker supported OpenWRT systems with 16MB Flash = (or more) and a decent amount of RAM. (If less flash is available, then you need to = remove some modules - our example config contain a lot of debug tools = directly built in)=20 Please be aware that the code is only a Proof-of-concept and probably = has security holes (like the debug ISIS screens on port 8080) and = probably lots of bugs. Enjoy, Martin Winter NetDEF / OpenSourceRouting --Apple-Mail=_97C22262-ACB1-4955-9B73-87212A8415D1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJT/t1tAAoJEAWk7PjAECMGapsQAIaOxUk0kSFXbetRlyFx0dkc 7tUEA/sXajlQQoekqZAKmyyFIgsORLDSLliajRhTNtWM6f/ZxwQaFrwmIToA98en K7Q2/KgUR0KZJcoRz4R2S5HsAQ3g30UUOjWw8z8wsDx9CnL19Rm1/B6KrBT64G9t NPF08uCRvc79d5av7NhORU8kDY2/cy9u0z55oDEYucWJyTdXcso7M5Cuf9rNh8Eu VgChS0Iv15jOKHFHBy7O836xTGZLpSMpAF+RGbTvJqkYRYQ6jXDz9eaLiwJkqsia kZ5pRXMIEHoZyWxW3p9XCq4QSGxwNeERJ8mEYSkeTaqzJoAWMZzCqB5nOEQEFWt/ vGU/I1jDY01xG0kljESYcN+lNMD4vx4oXYKZnoxizVUnBrnktAzclYj5GRNMI+GD tw3XYCmbqFpaAPUXulNIg8nQK++WTPEg3Y8Bphqxt7QaEwliQiR3oai9v+kz0Lxw fwMtZOU+fXBqCx3I1FnLXanDOY3DFFSftNlMD4vYrbMYLSWlLbSA0oPYygf9Y/mj 6QQElXNVjRg5DN9nOShMQtIbP3YQC19LNsJWnvv2iisZ85CXBG1wyI9GFqDj53ye vAh1j2/cFaa4Q2vF2EMZczLd9Nap6P39wUpYeyRiGZTnb0N6ZP92gU9WzVFJRVwO wM3so7b+6sJRuyS1hEPz =0w4V -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_97C22262-ACB1-4955-9B73-87212A8415D1--