From nobody Sun Nov 12 00:05:43 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBDE512711E for ; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 00:05:41 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.301 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.301 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_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cs.tcd.ie 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 hbvGIzrOvRGA for ; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 00:05:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 777911204DA for ; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 00:05:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B5A6BE4C; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 08:05:37 +0000 (GMT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7TT56I3S4XjE; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 08:05:35 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [31.133.148.54] (dhcp-9436.meeting.ietf.org [31.133.148.54]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B3BB2BE49; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 08:05:34 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; s=mail; t=1510473935; bh=V5+KcspMVTIrB8kk7h++LBFGmdiCwN+8AO7/cr1iymE=; h=To:Cc:From:Subject:Date:From; b=AO50Nojwy77Wz5NTEkFP2h58ve5ExgpX4ORQMxELxKISBSobdjH0qPbuKcKDFAYso Lz4t0wn4XZfjFbO8jhYADfMiIVYHXVOVcshHB17BymNzAnDo7GpoiSGAYghQFpG+3J jeI5StpopvWZzpQwfb+xaz1II+Oi1FWkibsxDkjU= To: "homenet@ietf.org" Cc: "jordi.palet@consulintel.es Martinez" , Ted Lemon From: Stephen Farrell Openpgp: id=D66EA7906F0B897FB2E97D582F3C8736805F8DA2; url= Message-ID: <019d8f22-3844-d377-918c-d5d1ce20750f@cs.tcd.ie> Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2017 08:05:32 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="4uohnv85JdX8TaopjhqVI2MQLtNM3bXJe" Archived-At: Subject: [homenet] Agenda & Slides for tomorrow please... X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2017 08:05:41 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --4uohnv85JdX8TaopjhqVI2MQLtNM3bXJe Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="WgFiVuxhsBpIdK6IpD0kq5xGUMqw922oU"; protected-headers="v1" From: Stephen Farrell To: "homenet@ietf.org" Cc: "jordi.palet@consulintel.es Martinez" , Ted Lemon Message-ID: <019d8f22-3844-d377-918c-d5d1ce20750f@cs.tcd.ie> Subject: Agenda & Slides for tomorrow please... --WgFiVuxhsBpIdK6IpD0kq5xGUMqw922oU Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hiya, We're meeting tomorrow @ 1550 local, 0750 UTC. Agenda is at [1], chair slides at [2]. Any comments (agenda-bash, stuff I forgot) welcome, just reply to this on or off list as appropriate. If you have a presentation slot (Jordi, Ted, cc'd) then please send any slides you want to use to the chairs before local lunchtime tomorrow. If you're willing to take notes or be a jabber scribe, great, thanks and please just send the chairs a note so we can thank you f2f at the meeting. (If nobody does that, we'll be prowling the room to find victims, so you may as well volunteer now:-) Thanks, S. [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/100/materials/agenda-100-homenet= / [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/100/materials/slides-100-homenet-cha= ir-slides/ --WgFiVuxhsBpIdK6IpD0kq5xGUMqw922oU-- --4uohnv85JdX8TaopjhqVI2MQLtNM3bXJe Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJaCADMAAoJEC88hzaAX42iVIwIALdhnhj6RZPH5bcqHkfGeRx0 IUkd3Zx5UmIfzpamRkfT0+wJZ6DOMjya9nD6ujKY6+te++Qx4SCLGpEAFjT5djI/ Bb+c9ix7RZbiS2p7JtnB9wcAmkPTzsIyPertnqHnY7pf5Jc7Dm3Do13YWM7VVgdd x0cE9TxpWyce3ltowtTY5YnOuRjcQpaOo3x2BvH9fp0+Aev1bG9YXK658KxNjux5 1x4jO5ZUKnKKUOrEctK9B8hAu66FVdMePsOOly4l0peDIvgasxGMqQnmPpVeSL7w JRA0r7niVe3ejfGSee4Fw2ycB8aaLc3Hz3OBBQUiN59nXdsd8x0MtW61gmvl1nI= =my7b -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --4uohnv85JdX8TaopjhqVI2MQLtNM3bXJe-- From nobody Sun Nov 12 16:34:53 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1D40127010 for ; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 16:34:45 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com 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 0v0fRccU1st4 for ; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 16:34:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-pg0-x233.google.com (mail-pg0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 61DE9126BF7 for ; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 16:34:43 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pg0-x233.google.com with SMTP id t10so10426685pgo.3 for ; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 16:34:43 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:mime-version:subject:message-id:references:to:date; bh=CVYlLzCoHSgD/0y42TNjT7p5do2ZWNku8aZAMZkLWEo=; b=NIMMw2K6PRxk4jMkBk7zM5FNofHsBltJ9R/iVJ91c+bSoFAa5GJYkmXeIRHK1QqPDB KtrmfrDfbpmkCeUxdUPRMW1h0l7ZwSd1dgdvs1jhhH6+mAW3EfEIqJl6qjGDcFtxoKx5 aW9TJpn2MfBrLCmqMYkN29io1Cnf1iXcdpb8GNqMOUqP3h7cjMZ2QxHaqVH+FXIf9QPz C08glR9Sp0/k5IXZj7NRgR0cgH9eIP4OIy3uT/ZXwu8pROAMIOVvia/ihv7qkhkJjB/r LZvdtUm3K1X6M7fFLQZOW0NB2wVR7aRaYTTlA2ORKQ6xILlLT7Ha7cXxL6x+LRzbrdX9 2chw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:mime-version:subject:message-id:references :to:date; bh=CVYlLzCoHSgD/0y42TNjT7p5do2ZWNku8aZAMZkLWEo=; b=Fu9hwXpDGDyOweG9aiBfi5z7IDAVdtnKAvch8G1cXnH4CW7IsU6+fRxZCXryAnX95/ aFv35cL9edo7z1fKs2ciyoxnM/QSwLujMF64Ek5GjrzR51REvQNUG556bQm1zF7uetlU VsVplIT1O2ZkIcBiW62CUvUSVfeY/ZinoXDMKheluseFlDvio59rzqLHjiU8FdNJ4ZTD uJeM7eFaoZlw6cwE1UlK7HyDU9Kp4snBZY5hYa40olYR8disPv3X41Jj3LGEBwRZH/Ky ycjGxT18BtCxoRVuWbdQVWlqsFHUavn2iZjNx53SBwS8xj13ERJXLFDGYLsKrYnSxxGM Fi9g== X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX5wRlK05loYQeAvjnAlWYK7XHHNBGnkUiyky4qTguNmfgdmhNLs Dz5rvH9fOlYVjm2XEDvp+T8TV8pVvIU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMZf+Xm7qtHnS6QIW1n1SyOH9xFNBZrzRue7wM+u8goNluKpsW5UikAGamqZisvLMWizWZiT1Q== X-Received: by 10.99.121.14 with SMTP id u14mr7009555pgc.420.1510533282947; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 16:34:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPv6:2001:67c:1232:144:f423:c00b:4688:1866? ([2001:67c:1232:144:f423:c00b:4688:1866]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u12sm2999463pfi.87.2017.11.12.16.34.41 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 12 Nov 2017 16:34:42 -0800 (PST) From: Ted Lemon Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_714FFDAB-4ADF-4C1C-9BF4-8D7B2AB594B8" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\)) Message-Id: <37D1FFE1-C789-49CB-9255-2DE2C289975E@fugue.com> References: <151053298229.21346.17987756524110530546.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> To: dnssd@ietf.org, HOMENET Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2017 08:34:40 +0800 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273) Archived-At: Subject: [homenet] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-sctl-dnssd-mdns-relay-02.txt X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2017 00:34:46 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_714FFDAB-4ADF-4C1C-9BF4-8D7B2AB594B8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I've uploaded a new version of the mDNS Discovery Relay document with = the changes from the hackathon. If you are planning to read it and = haven't yet read it, this is the version to read. :) There are no substantive architectural changes; mostly this is = editorial, but we reduced the total number of TLVs and changed behavior = in small ways. If you have an implementation, you will care; = otherwise, perhaps not. > Begin forwarded message: >=20 > From: internet-drafts@ietf.org > Subject: New Version Notification for = draft-sctl-dnssd-mdns-relay-02.txt > Date: November 13, 2017 at 8:29:42 AM GMT+8 > To: "Stuart Cheshire" , "Ted Lemon" = >=20 >=20 > A new version of I-D, draft-sctl-dnssd-mdns-relay-02.txt > has been successfully submitted by Ted Lemon and posted to the > IETF repository. >=20 > Name: draft-sctl-dnssd-mdns-relay > Revision: 02 > Title: Multicast DNS Discovery Relay > Document date: 2017-11-12 > Group: Individual Submission > Pages: 18 > URL: = https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-sctl-dnssd-mdns-relay-02.txt > Status: = https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sctl-dnssd-mdns-relay/ > Htmlized: = https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-sctl-dnssd-mdns-relay-02 > Htmlized: = https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-sctl-dnssd-mdns-relay-02 > Diff: = https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-sctl-dnssd-mdns-relay-02 >=20 > Abstract: > This document extends the specification of the Discovery Proxy for > Multicast DNS-Based Service Discovery. It describes a lightweight > relay mechanism, a Discovery Relay, which allows Discovery Proxies = to > provide service on multicast links to which they are not directly > attached. >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of = submission > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. >=20 > The IETF Secretariat >=20 --Apple-Mail=_714FFDAB-4ADF-4C1C-9BF4-8D7B2AB594B8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii I've uploaded a new version of the mDNS Discovery Relay = document with the changes from the hackathon.   If you are planning = to read it and haven't yet read it, this is the version to read. :)

There are no substantive = architectural changes; mostly this is editorial, but we reduced the = total number of TLVs and changed behavior in small ways.   If you = have an implementation, you will care; otherwise, perhaps not.

Begin forwarded message:

From: = internet-drafts@ietf.org
Subject: = New Version = Notification for draft-sctl-dnssd-mdns-relay-02.txt
Date: = November 13, 2017 at 8:29:42 AM = GMT+8
To: = "Stuart Cheshire" <cheshire@apple.com>, = "Ted Lemon" <mellon@fugue.com>


A new version = of I-D, draft-sctl-dnssd-mdns-relay-02.txt
has been = successfully submitted by Ted Lemon and posted to the
IETF = repository.

Name: = draft-sctl-dnssd-mdns-relay
Revision: 02
Title:= = Multicast DNS Discovery Relay
Document date: = 2017-11-12
Group: Individual Submission
Pages:= = 18
URL: =            https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-sctl-dnssd-mdns-rela= y-02.txt
Status: =         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sctl-dnssd-mdns-relay/
Htmlized:       https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-sctl-dnssd-mdns-relay-02<= br class=3D"">Htmlized:       https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-sctl-dnssd-mdns-rel= ay-02
Diff: =           https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-sctl-dnssd-mdns-relay= -02

Abstract:
=   This document extends the specification of the Discovery = Proxy for
  Multicast DNS-Based Service = Discovery.  It describes a lightweight
=   relay mechanism, a Discovery Relay, which allows Discovery = Proxies to
  provide service on multicast links = to which they are not directly
  attached.




Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the = time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are = available at tools.ietf.org.

The IETF = Secretariat


= --Apple-Mail=_714FFDAB-4ADF-4C1C-9BF4-8D7B2AB594B8-- From nobody Sun Nov 12 22:16:07 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DF43128D16 for ; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 22:16:06 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.301 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.301 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_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cs.tcd.ie 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 EoC0FmkHE2cn for ; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 22:16:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A342C129445 for ; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 22:16:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44064BDF9 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 06:16:01 +0000 (GMT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bFnCP_bl0Zhc for ; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 06:15:59 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [31.133.132.197] (dhcp-84c5.meeting.ietf.org [31.133.132.197]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 09CFEBDD8 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 06:15:58 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; s=mail; t=1510553759; bh=ri8/UHXwCi7Y70CEoZlRtdYPMDlIi3EagDEHjKqMDS4=; h=To:From:Subject:Date:From; b=GtnQqTjttJuRLU/qbz803k2HcxCMgUzNH5VosZBg753VvJZGqOyNsGuM9l/bhdmg5 xu/JErSLNJ0zkWvkY+q4VTGlS+jerDkSC5yhQSpKgpI3EACu7cSsWPlNSIpVSr2DUH rL8+C/32YzWuLNjPWshWeGfCzl17Q84gK9/L64MA= To: "homenet@ietf.org" From: Stephen Farrell Openpgp: id=D66EA7906F0B897FB2E97D582F3C8736805F8DA2; url= Message-ID: <9d3963f1-68a4-6925-f8b5-282be6f15787@cs.tcd.ie> Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2017 06:15:55 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="jp9qais1NM8ka8QUEVtcmpgv186m6k5vK" Archived-At: Subject: [homenet] comments on babel-profile-03 X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2017 06:16:06 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --jp9qais1NM8ka8QUEVtcmpgv186m6k5vK Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="tGHTt39IcEW2ctveTgCLMrx3XHQBTlhA7"; protected-headers="v1" From: Stephen Farrell To: "homenet@ietf.org" Message-ID: <9d3963f1-68a4-6925-f8b5-282be6f15787@cs.tcd.ie> Subject: comments on babel-profile-03 --tGHTt39IcEW2ctveTgCLMrx3XHQBTlhA7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hiya, I re-read babel-profile-03 and have a few comments (below) offered as a WG participant (i.e. chair hat off) as part of WGLC. If any of these were discussed already, then just pointing me at the archive is a fine answer. (And apologies for not having been active in the WG earlier if there are such cases.) - Req5: Is "MUST be... of a similar magnitude..." clear enough? - 2.2: I'm not sure this entire section is useful. If there is something specific we'd like to avoid (at a MUST NOT or NOT RECOMMENDED level), it'd be better to say exactly what. - NR2: I don't see the point of that. If - section 3: "...using the existing redistribution mechanisms" could maybe do with a reference for seme well known OS. - NR3: I don't see what is not required here, that seems like a straightforward 2119 MAY statement - section 4: "only susceptible" seems like overstatment. If babel picks up routes from the OS and then annouces those, then it seems the statement is not true, as any way of getting a route into the OS will cause babel to propogate that, or am I wrong? If not, then the babel profile seems to be susceptible to any problems that cause a dodgy route to be installed in the OS kernel. - section 4: "secured at a lower layer" includes links with no security (in reality), is that right? - section 4: "trusted X" is not a good term unless you say who/what is trusting whom/what for what. So, s/trusted links/links/ would be better. - section 4: The security properties here seem to be directly and wholly dependent on nodes being able to safely identify interfaces into the categories in 5.1 of 7788. I need to do some more reading to convince myself that that's a good thing to assume. If there are weaknesses in that assumption, then it'd be better to call those out here, as that'd help folks who're implementing and might also help in the later process for this draft. (IOW, I won't be the only one to ask, so we might as well be up-front if there are weak points in that argument;-) - section 4: I dislike the plan of assuming lower layer security but if that's the WG consensus, then that's what it is. Is there a link to the discussion that concluded that in the WG archive? I suspect we'll be asked by directorate reviewers/IESG so good to have that now. If there's no such link, then we probably should start a specific thread that ends with that conclusion (or changes the draft.) Cheers, S. --tGHTt39IcEW2ctveTgCLMrx3XHQBTlhA7-- --jp9qais1NM8ka8QUEVtcmpgv186m6k5vK Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJaCTibAAoJEC88hzaAX42iGNcH/j4gfET2QlhRHS24rWePt0gt rud4Wh8aIPjDp02oxXdfZYBmId87pekjPTbkZFZqsyKDnB8eUOS1HTvpYIPy6hrh PMLBnCJE/yDO8YNBFKmfXDfHu0QVBaf9/TsSaHeqzF+zGE3UPzU9wTcV6kqCYEmA uMIxZURkoXZgkEbKEnOmE013rHpILBlhRYtp9ONo0cAokj3PXCp9wcQH2WpTzncp 7Rwj6tuOxQIrYvxpbGaelYy6wIa0e6cL1WaxPPj8uu7tFjJH0Ub+h/B1IM/Rh2+K 47HK49jNboQzGzSM9T37ujhBBoPAQHomZnMcJDdDoDgwS/cHbPwsi+70yBPUrJM= =Zx/e -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --jp9qais1NM8ka8QUEVtcmpgv186m6k5vK-- From nobody Mon Nov 13 20:31:23 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AF6B126C3D for ; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 20:31:22 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.301 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.301 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_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cs.tcd.ie 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 5Ig8EEjC52WL for ; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 20:31:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6CAFF126C19 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 20:31:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2338BE2E for ; Tue, 14 Nov 2017 04:31:17 +0000 (GMT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Gy7cPG2bFnOj for ; Tue, 14 Nov 2017 04:31:16 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [31.133.129.255] (dhcp-81ff.meeting.ietf.org [31.133.129.255]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CEF21BDCC for ; Tue, 14 Nov 2017 04:31:15 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; s=mail; t=1510633876; bh=g3An8Io/AgNaxFy6rTtbxhsaL9n9R97TYYtbiib3ksQ=; h=To:From:Subject:Date:From; b=dTWPEBOExqmnG3d4LUyenUDZJZqItOPKoBnxB3ZpAx5Hdtl6WLH+/2nlDpGyd+NXY 7sSE9R94eaL5Iks6SpxeefQdquIRtEjHyAMYC9CJpSPlOIZXoN0fx/rFTUYImswRp4 JNZbNxZAhnA24vxdYC+az0nQk7pDA4stuKuLuh5M= To: "homenet@ietf.org" From: Stephen Farrell Openpgp: id=D66EA7906F0B897FB2E97D582F3C8736805F8DA2; url= Message-ID: <26f02935-1cff-4917-6315-387d5053db09@cs.tcd.ie> Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2017 04:31:11 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="uhfPbEGcNjCsTB3Mf4uNSxPcmWs6RrRar" Archived-At: Subject: [homenet] breakfast meeting tomorrow (wed) on security X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2017 04:31:22 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --uhfPbEGcNjCsTB3Mf4uNSxPcmWs6RrRar Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="5eCuojOLPDoXks6doFOnm2UV6b8GF0h5d"; protected-headers="v1" From: Stephen Farrell To: "homenet@ietf.org" Message-ID: <26f02935-1cff-4917-6315-387d5053db09@cs.tcd.ie> Subject: breakfast meeting tomorrow (wed) on security --5eCuojOLPDoXks6doFOnm2UV6b8GF0h5d Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hiya, We mentioned this in the session yesterday and someone suggested it'd be good to send to the list so... A bunch of folks who're at the IETF meeting and interested in doing work on homenet security plan to meet for breakfast at 8am at the IETF registration desk. If you'd like to help then please come along (bring your own breakfast). We'll meet there and then go find a room somewhere to chat. Cheers, S. --5eCuojOLPDoXks6doFOnm2UV6b8GF0h5d-- --uhfPbEGcNjCsTB3Mf4uNSxPcmWs6RrRar Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJaCnGPAAoJEC88hzaAX42i6NkH/j5lcvzB+5ewrpG89/5OQ9CJ nG6NPIyhlRjL7eS+8vrnGFu+cxBc+CDJbm/TDF/TGHbGIedH2npBc66zn4oHGYNo t95f2VcLoE6OAJYYQzDcBgpIRmbgTXZwleZjwWkowGme4X1Ri+7FhmZIEgnXzcuG KFlE2qSRGFZbA4xHYozQNiPSPoG4RiYAXi6PvQGcaZ2FBUFI/VcIuHHEH/Rhodss JYPo/R+B+Q7MM7JG+pJtip1szv3MI0TPwbPbtA0Vk1fZSXbGC9rnS8w7n9IQGl5G iit6Bpwt+wjjLB5xVEhEqm/unYJZ/+Amf8RKHZUy1tqle7KcM/0PsTRdk+uikCk= =Swy6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --uhfPbEGcNjCsTB3Mf4uNSxPcmWs6RrRar-- From nobody Wed Nov 15 21:00:20 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FD4B1294C4 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 21:00:19 -0800 (PST) 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] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=consulintel.es; domainkeys=pass (1024-bit key) header.from=jordi.palet@consulintel.es header.d=consulintel.es 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 roYFabFID9dM for ; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 21:00:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.consulintel.es (mail.consulintel.es [217.126.185.215]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E3A23129410 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 21:00:16 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=consulintel.es; s=MDaemon; t=1510808415; x=1511413215; q=dns/txt; h=DomainKey-Signature: Received:User-Agent:Date:Subject:From:To:Message-ID:Thread-Topic: Mime-version:Content-type:Content-transfer-encoding:Reply-To; bh=nBMM68VQhAcKs1zkY0OV/CNt4lLLqVkNYxcNQClgTgQ=; b=mTT4CX0wr6wQa bSRx4Xb/nn8P6WXLu/mr9iL75CzYtetm49QDH4za6kkofRxHHf624N/6gkmldTtn 36Z/G+PkZSXqAYSpS1X4G0EKYNcd109oDP5ZqAMMHuew2zJXieFfQ1Z3MjZ8X2SI w0rw54ffr97+a3loxy9YEuuEBm3H6Q= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=MDaemon; d=consulintel.es; c=simple; q=dns; h=from:message-id; b=XpS/AhrQdFsgPGmO0CKVuT1i9l5xP2pqk6XqMa0fB15wDrCMeg7pXQrmGwt3 JN3Kp8R0lePchx9k2+bupHNJBJsO/4tAVGdyAz15oRihcEr0VUnNJsuwq k1cY6xLWS/d3ogZWh5a3TQttGJAaZNTFGIuZ4bOXLHtB4xGGsXkq5c=; X-MDAV-Processed: mail.consulintel.es, Thu, 16 Nov 2017 06:00:15 +0100 X-Spam-Processed: mail.consulintel.es, Thu, 16 Nov 2017 06:00:14 +0100 Received: from [172.20.60.6] by mail.consulintel.es (MDaemon PRO v11.0.3) with ESMTP id md50005625209.msg for ; Thu, 16 Nov 2017 06:00:14 +0100 X-MDOP-RefID: re=0.000,fgs=0 (_st=1 _vt=0 _iwf=0) X-Authenticated-Sender: jordi.palet@consulintel.es X-HashCash: 1:20:171116:md50005625209::iPg2L7Toq9VyoWk3:000048sD X-Return-Path: prvs=1493446864=jordi.palet@consulintel.es X-Envelope-From: jordi.palet@consulintel.es X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: homenet@ietf.org User-Agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/f.27.0.171010 Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2017 12:59:57 +0800 From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ To: Message-ID: <30DB1ABA-97E5-4EC0-8D3F-635F30E774FE@consulintel.es> Thread-Topic: supporting homenet in CE routers Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Reply-To: jordi.palet@consulintel.es Archived-At: Subject: [homenet] supporting homenet in CE routers X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2017 05:00:19 -0000 Hi, As requested in the meeting, here is the question to the WG. Do we believe that homenet WG should work in a document to specify how and = what IPv6 CE routers should support for a correct homenet support? My initial guess, after the discussion is that this document should start e= xplaining both models (=E2=80=9CMy friendly ISP=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9CMy ho= me, my castle=E2=80=9D), pros and cons of each one, and if we have a way to= support both models. If we believe that=E2=80=99s the case, I=E2=80=99m happy to start working o= n that. Anyone else to co-author it? Regards, Jordi =20 ********************************************** IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.consulintel.es The IPv6 Company This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or con= fidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the i= ndividual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, = copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if p= artially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be cons= idered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware t= hat any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this in= formation, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibi= ted, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the origin= al sender to inform about this communication and delete it. From nobody Wed Nov 15 23:25:01 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09A611296D2 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 23:25:00 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.621 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.621 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 cd4rGKvXH6Pm for ; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 23:24:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.149.140]) (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 9F3FE12894A for ; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 23:24:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0049287.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0049287.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.16.0.21/8.16.0.21) with SMTP id vAG6u65k028943 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 2017 02:03:22 -0500 Received: from alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp6.sbc.com [144.160.229.23]) by m0049287.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 2e8ykqpy7r-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 16 Nov 2017 02:03:22 -0500 Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id vAG73L5E019528 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 2017 02:03:21 -0500 Received: from alpi132.aldc.att.com (alpi132.aldc.att.com [130.8.217.2]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id vAG73FIF019514 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 16 Nov 2017 02:03:16 -0500 Received: from GAALPA1MSGHUBAE.ITServices.sbc.com (GAALPA1MSGHUBAE.itservices.sbc.com [130.8.218.154]) by alpi132.aldc.att.com (RSA Interceptor) for ; Thu, 16 Nov 2017 07:03:06 GMT Received: from GAALPA1MSGUSRBA.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.8.211.37]) by GAALPA1MSGHUBAE.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.8.218.154]) with mapi id 14.03.0361.001; Thu, 16 Nov 2017 02:03:06 -0500 From: "STARK, BARBARA H" To: "homenet@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: IETF100 minutes Thread-Index: AdNeqKzzFHmKcKX7RlmCI1JD0a3A6Q== Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2017 07:03:05 +0000 Message-ID: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DCAD5C7@GAALPA1MSGUSRBA.ITServices.sbc.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [135.70.53.187] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-RSA-Inspected: yes X-RSA-Classifications: public X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2017-11-16_01:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1709140000 definitions=main-1711160097 Archived-At: Subject: [homenet] IETF100 minutes X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2017 07:25:00 -0000 Draft minutes have been uploaded. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-100-homenet/ Thanks to Tim Wicinski for supplying them (and Mikael for jabbering). Comments welcome. Barbara From nobody Thu Nov 16 06:35:27 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AC40127137; Thu, 16 Nov 2017 06:35:11 -0800 (PST) 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 QmpECVEr3WSG; Thu, 16 Nov 2017 06:35:06 -0800 (PST) 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 160F112950B; Thu, 16 Nov 2017 06:35:05 -0800 (PST) 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/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id vAGEZ37H017190 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 16 Nov 2017 15:35:03 +0100 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/relay2/75695) with ESMTP id vAGEZ3pH021938; Thu, 16 Nov 2017 15:35:03 +0100 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81578EB364; Thu, 16 Nov 2017 15:35:03 +0100 (CET) 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 m3rSXXWDnV6c; Thu, 16 Nov 2017 15:34:59 +0100 (CET) Received: from lanthane.pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr (unknown [172.23.36.54]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 76B89EB216; Thu, 16 Nov 2017 15:34:59 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lanthane.irif.fr) by lanthane.pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1eFLFr-0003rD-4p; Thu, 16 Nov 2017 15:34:59 +0100 Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2017 15:34:59 +0100 Message-ID: <7ir2sy47ho.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: "homenet@ietf.org" , babel@ietf.org 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]); Thu, 16 Nov 2017 15:35:03 +0100 (CET) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.141]); Thu, 16 Nov 2017 15:35:03 +0100 (CET) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5A0DA217.003 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-Miltered: at potemkin with ID 5A0DA217.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5A0DA217.003 from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/null/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5A0DA217.001 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 : 5A0DA217.003 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5A0DA217.001 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: Subject: [homenet] About draft-homenet-babel-profile X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2017 14:35:11 -0000 Cross-posting between Babel and Homenet. At this morning's Babel meeting, Barbara asked whether the work going on in Babel on security means that homenet-babel-profile should be delayed. I said no. Please, no. I beg you, Barbara, no. I started working on this document in early autumn of 2016. I've done a lot of work on it, listened to a fair amount of feedback, and it's reached a state where it's concise, accurate and understandable. After over a year, my enthusiasm for this document is starting to wane. I now still have enough energy to go through IESG review, I cannot promise that it'll still be the case if it is delayed by a few months, or, Eris forbid, years. Let's please advance this document, and use the energy we'll save this way to improve the security of both Babel and Homenet. -- Juliusz From nobody Thu Nov 16 11:45:49 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A52A124205 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 2017 11:45:47 -0800 (PST) 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com 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 V9jdJikL6FpZ for ; Thu, 16 Nov 2017 11:45:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-pg0-x22f.google.com (mail-pg0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AE2431201F2 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 2017 11:45:45 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pg0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id 4so121568pge.1 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 2017 11:45:45 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=tZsx0iDL2sJRcUDuueyuzhHUel4Ge50ptTBbJUnXglg=; b=fR4OoQaTYBAiFwMvmnA9O6iMx5/GsPZSPtE88lyvNTdxtqJG9kZDwZLL9k9XkbJGCA i6ZAmGjNpq6+tk2ey2p+p4qm3BxpL5w1Mngm53L1s4q8u+S+l6MhvAMuPVZWOUk9OVuN k2bg1M/iyEdZ62L06ddhFwUZa2wYeX2lnlgIeqg2oy+QiEVyNBqnxkPlgtghmcp+4P+C FFovqiO5hIdrBFCdAlir6ZyyQ+LbK4TICMRP/BEFigrlrGv4oqbY9ooBU+wVsOfLknKq Ini4cVmcx40uLx4hDRR4y5n/DhRaaVz+cAhLowIoTd+tX+1yz2+trjZ+fWbqCPh9Ph/2 L9Lg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=tZsx0iDL2sJRcUDuueyuzhHUel4Ge50ptTBbJUnXglg=; b=jjYkbiYsUGcdHdxR4cWhfFj+4arhZJfeg2wT+9qa3Z54/U+fne853KZBbKNWtYbA4b 1fV+lmjGF6xpbpRP2TEwsHPLirWdbhhSmM4ctf/8druhvh8BgXanTeDlmAZv78Wrzw4d x06pIppfJNrIXmZthCfYy3DGD/zmIsza9sJFocoEb7HlNaqS7QcAD+emLyKGF6G3Zn1y 6PySAU81J8PuHyVnfNNIpqtAhHxyXJ4XNgpf4uhtzSpwWk/L5Q2swEDJeVMfeuX7yZx/ +1xh7bLmpKLqhpfTy60vEZvRPYwELd09i5raGAXoaqm4o0OhO0mPjCjz1a4bcfQOMnpS QXyA== X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX5CRlfSxDQiGQT82A42ioifMLrQzKSu3wnDWKCYFZEGTX7E+lbC IR6tf7LgyfCh1LLNXn/zXQYvlZ00h6k= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMZCGXV2G894U8j4owc9hvsi57k1Gsu6bvV/CweNYXnpGYNcDr77GnB+4Dmg5A/2CCOnqUKsUQ== X-Received: by 10.99.155.25 with SMTP id r25mr2599169pgd.397.1510861544870; Thu, 16 Nov 2017 11:45:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPv6:2620::10e7:10:a5ca:6de1:c280:7c3f? ([2620:0:10e7:10:a5ca:6de1:c280:7c3f]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 69sm3926766pfj.28.2017.11.16.11.45.43 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 16 Nov 2017 11:45:44 -0800 (PST) From: james woodyatt Message-Id: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_2622F96C-FB74-44F8-A1E1-1DC90108A928" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\)) Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2017 11:45:43 -0800 In-Reply-To: <30DB1ABA-97E5-4EC0-8D3F-635F30E774FE@consulintel.es> Cc: homenet@ietf.org To: jordi.palet@consulintel.es References: <30DB1ABA-97E5-4EC0-8D3F-635F30E774FE@consulintel.es> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [homenet] supporting homenet in CE routers X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2017 19:45:47 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_2622F96C-FB74-44F8-A1E1-1DC90108A928 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Nov 15, 2017, at 20:59, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ = wrote: >=20 > As requested in the meeting, here is the question to the WG. > Do we believe that homenet WG should work in a document to specify how = and what IPv6 CE routers should support for a correct homenet support? My answer to this question has not changed. I believe the WG should not = try to write any specification applicable to IPv6 CE routers. Instead I = strongly believe the resources of the working group are best spent on = specifying the behavior of HOMENET domain interior routers, recognizing = the ways existing IPv6 CE routers behave, and the documenting the = considerations entailed by their behavior for the benefit of developers = of interior routers. I do not believe that HOMENET is in any position to = specify how IPv6 CE routers are to behave. --james woodyatt > --Apple-Mail=_2622F96C-FB74-44F8-A1E1-1DC90108A928 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii On Nov 15, 2017, at 20:59, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet@consulintel.es> wrote:

As requested in the meeting, here is the = question to the WG.
Do we believe that homenet WG should = work in a document to specify how and what IPv6 CE routers should = support for a correct homenet support?

My = answer to this question has not changed. I believe the WG should not try = to write any specification applicable to IPv6 CE routers. Instead I = strongly believe the resources of the working group are best spent on = specifying the behavior of HOMENET domain interior routers, recognizing = the ways existing IPv6 CE routers behave, and the documenting the = considerations entailed by their behavior for the benefit of developers = of interior routers. I do not believe that HOMENET is in any position to = specify how IPv6 CE routers are to behave.


--james woodyatt <jhw@google.com>



= --Apple-Mail=_2622F96C-FB74-44F8-A1E1-1DC90108A928-- From nobody Fri Nov 17 00:07:05 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 681CB1293E4 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 2017 00:07:04 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=inf-net-nl.20150623.gappssmtp.com 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 JVDszsIkgSOT for ; Fri, 17 Nov 2017 00:07:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wm0-x22c.google.com (mail-wm0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA17E1293DA for ; Fri, 17 Nov 2017 00:07:01 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id v186so4643340wma.2 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 2017 00:07:01 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=inf-net-nl.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=spuhZBj3al55dYOxc1hFduN86/hl7B9VW36a5m1dM9U=; b=R2N+1ONPQqzKYOrrE2EXoiwPFvu/MEAyffB5MyrrffPPCYm+jT8YbMok9MGDIv2xzu jn2iJMu+iMcyidoYjf/+uIxKg9zw4Wqxu3iePvYLbgdkzgxaHkr+kn7gyD94iJH5zsTA X4NAWCQg5Wdj1/No73qJE9KvZJRHsYdLe3LLrd54e4ka4ZDJ03yxNfYW7F/LxI//wybS e1n08llefVTTBHuENrJNHtqzGo+FtRTMbteDcCnyKSWhIqgT0jtfTU8jqxq3s7mzVfZA ny1zp3gGmLzQZFtnL+ttk1zfKK5/iGKc/ThzmC0/Z7Vmvs+LnwoCZ9UCDjju6qi7r3wb MR2A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=spuhZBj3al55dYOxc1hFduN86/hl7B9VW36a5m1dM9U=; b=CWQ5GniPNtd0ZABSzvwHtVJd7r4AbwKZQuV5Im0Hmg0wEPffv+hJzCyir8Yb3hd+/J UV5AalgMRFw4O1WveTUSEM6yEMFvE9gYfaOx3JY3KqVB/q9ciFn/CpPWRub5nfWhdG70 /oCk+C2xSa5dK2DpaAGDXTXsv7Z+Wpb70yIEWrKSzDu7Q/bLef1gk48HrN+0tRpy5Aq2 LmzTgy+MP1MG3De3r+/Tg++PpOmqrGe6SsNE3/YzMsyuwyOOfF2vgkkyBhQGSCEfGfku HnY4fkKaT/BosHt7jY86J+x50ImRAD7S/J0TNIP9TMqL34jwedEv2WzWgCFX6cetU47k DMpw== X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX7xWhH8DIv5VWxdwvO3sh0noAmKRvKkrnk9yIbwbgvNs9dWrpe8 zuD4N+vyKDB8nXb59guSn3ZmSYxjtbs= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMbljXJYLAh58kL4nScGLI001SwJmennZusGFFN3aTZIzIddqdwdj7V2IFRyl8sipgVQt5FPyw== X-Received: by 10.80.138.99 with SMTP id i90mr6437447edi.207.1510906019481; Fri, 17 Nov 2017 00:06:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from ipv6.dynamic.ziggo.nl ([2001:1c01:3101:6700:7e6d:62ff:fe8c:ee91]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 3sm2080859edv.50.2017.11.17.00.06.58 for (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 17 Nov 2017 00:06:58 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) From: Teco Boot In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2017 09:06:57 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <0E7FFCC1-E95E-4407-8579-528F801BA916@inf-net.nl> References: <30DB1ABA-97E5-4EC0-8D3F-635F30E774FE@consulintel.es> To: HOMENET X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [homenet] supporting homenet in CE routers X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2017 08:07:04 -0000 My 2ct: if an ISP provided IPv6 CE router (or other equipment) does = support HOMENET, HOMENET WG shall define ways to do it.=20 Why would my ISP be interested in HOMENET?=20 1) Looking around in my house, I see CE routers (one active) & hotspots = & mediaboxes sold or leased from my ISP. They have different origins. = Delivered in last couple of years. They interconnect via ethernet and = coax, I could choose powerline. How they interconnect: far from HOMENET = architecture. 2) My monthly fee is high enough to provide best class services. The ISP = offers Internet acces over cable and over the mobile network. Due to = merges, they have (leased) DSL in their portfolio as well. So they would = be interested in the HOMENET multihoming capability, even for a single = subscription. My neighbors living further away from my village have = low-speed DSL and mobile network only. Here, the business case for = multi-homing is evident. Teco=20 > Op 16 nov. 2017, om 20:45 heeft james woodyatt het = volgende geschreven: >=20 > On Nov 15, 2017, at 20:59, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ = wrote: >>=20 >> As requested in the meeting, here is the question to the WG. >> Do we believe that homenet WG should work in a document to specify = how and what IPv6 CE routers should support for a correct homenet = support? >=20 > My answer to this question has not changed. I believe the WG should = not try to write any specification applicable to IPv6 CE routers. = Instead I strongly believe the resources of the working group are best = spent on specifying the behavior of HOMENET domain interior routers, = recognizing the ways existing IPv6 CE routers behave, and the = documenting the considerations entailed by their behavior for the = benefit of developers of interior routers. I do not believe that HOMENET = is in any position to specify how IPv6 CE routers are to behave. >=20 >=20 > --james woodyatt >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > homenet mailing list > homenet@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet From nobody Sun Nov 19 08:05:56 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DAE9120727 for ; Sun, 19 Nov 2017 08:05:55 -0800 (PST) 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 EwTExassBmfU for ; Sun, 19 Nov 2017 08:05:53 -0800 (PST) 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 37348126DFE for ; Sun, 19 Nov 2017 08:05:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id vAJG5jfU022177; Sun, 19 Nov 2017 17:05:45 +0100 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F382EB21F; Sun, 19 Nov 2017 17:05:45 +0100 (CET) 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 1s_9t4byd1l4; Sun, 19 Nov 2017 17:05:44 +0100 (CET) Received: from trurl.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C1255EB216; Sun, 19 Nov 2017 17:05:43 +0100 (CET) Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2017 17:05:43 +0100 Message-ID: <87y3n2ntig.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: Stephen Farrell Cc: "homenet@ietf.org" In-Reply-To: <9d3963f1-68a4-6925-f8b5-282be6f15787@cs.tcd.ie> References: <9d3963f1-68a4-6925-f8b5-282be6f15787@cs.tcd.ie> 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 [194.254.61.138]); Sun, 19 Nov 2017 17:05:45 +0100 (CET) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5A11ABD9.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5A11ABD9.000 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 : 5A11ABD9.000 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [homenet] comments on babel-profile-03 X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2017 16:05:55 -0000 > I re-read babel-profile-03 and have a few comments (below) > offered as a WG participant (i.e. chair hat off) as part of > WGLC. Thanks, this is appreciated. > - Req5: Is "MUST be... of a similar magnitude..." clear enough? Yes. Minor tweaks to metrics don't cause suboptimal routing -- if one router vendor chooses 64 as the cose of a wired link, and another uses 96, then one hop is still preferred to two hops, which is what matters at the end. On the other hand, if one router vendor picks a cost of 1 and another one chooses 256, then bad routing will occur. Here, the costs are not of similar magnitude. The reason we don't want to be too precise here is that we want to encourage vendors to experiment with smarter out-of-the-box metrics. For example, a vendor that cares about powerline ethernet should be allowed to do something smart to prefer Ethernet to powerline. > - 2.2: I'm not sure this entire section is useful. If there is > something specific we'd like to avoid (at a MUST NOT or NOT > RECOMMENDED level), it'd be better to say exactly what. "Non-recommendations" are just MAYs. Perhaps the term is badly chosen, if you have a better suggestion, I'm listening. What this section says is basically "if you want to be smart, that's cool, but if you're in a rush, don't bother, it's not expected to be particularly useful in a home network". Let me know if you have suggestions to make it clearer. > - NR2: I don't see the point of that. If See above. The point here is the rationale -- we're explaining why the smarter metric computation algorithms are not going to matter in a home network. > - section 3: "...using the existing redistribution mechanisms" > could maybe do with a reference for seme well known OS. I think redistribution is a standard term -- it's used by Quagga and by Cisco, at least. > - NR3: I don't see what is not required here, that seems like a > straightforward 2119 MAY statement Yes. See above. > - section 4: "only susceptible" seems like overstatment. If > babel picks up routes from the OS and then annouces those, [...] > - section 4: "secured at a lower layer" includes links with no > security (in reality), is that right? [...] > - section 4: "trusted X" is not a good term unless you say > who/what is trusting whom/what for what. So, s/trusted > links/links/ would be better. [...] > - section 4: The security properties here seem to be directly > and wholly dependent on nodes being able to safely identify > interfaces into the categories in 5.1 of 7788. I need to do > some more reading to convince myself that that's a good thing > to assume. [...] > If there are weaknesses in that assumption, then it'd be better to call > those out here, [...] > - section 4: I dislike the plan of assuming lower layer security [...] You're right on all counts, as usual. However, this document is called "Homenet Babel Profile", it's not called "Security Considerations for the Homenet Protocol Suite". I think the right thing to do would be to replace all of Section 4 with a single sentence that says "This document describes the profile of Babel that is implement in Homenet implementations and the interaction between HNCP and Babel. It does not in any way change the security properties of those two protocols." and let somebody competent write another document, called "Security Considerations for the Homenet Protocol Suite". Is that a plan? -- Juliusz From nobody Sun Nov 19 15:52:40 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FB941205F1 for ; Sun, 19 Nov 2017 15:52:38 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.301 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.301 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_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cs.tcd.ie 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 dHIs-roN5w12 for ; Sun, 19 Nov 2017 15:52:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5E9971201FA for ; Sun, 19 Nov 2017 15:52:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59A36BE74; Sun, 19 Nov 2017 23:52:32 +0000 (GMT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JJG88wtfVvjM; Sun, 19 Nov 2017 23:52:29 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [10.244.2.100] (95-45-153-252-dynamic.agg2.phb.bdt-fng.eircom.net [95.45.153.252]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2A055BE64; Sun, 19 Nov 2017 23:52:29 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; s=mail; t=1511135549; bh=cJUUbNlIKkzTtm54RzIPscPSaw4zWzKkgp1Q9xLjYO4=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=1oRninoVROk6bEduV89gQ505LfklNTE17mYjCQHmYdxivgfLr1/VlPpKnG/qkd72w 1NI4rbhmuFnnOaXsy27O3rbD0KPjPrChRvFcnByoaDVocPM07JQIj1Wvt3zYwOk2cJ dp4qgSlp6OaxjCJ6QydOUHZPlLBxc6xSLqoqaQTA= To: Juliusz Chroboczek Cc: "homenet@ietf.org" References: <9d3963f1-68a4-6925-f8b5-282be6f15787@cs.tcd.ie> <87y3n2ntig.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Stephen Farrell Openpgp: id=D66EA7906F0B897FB2E97D582F3C8736805F8DA2; url= Message-ID: <726cad26-76c3-7838-6a8e-3dc4809e50a3@cs.tcd.ie> Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2017 23:52:28 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87y3n2ntig.wl-jch@irif.fr> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="3gs3qLW5kDQ1CECOk4AuL56HD5q4w8NGR" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [homenet] comments on babel-profile-03 X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2017 23:52:38 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --3gs3qLW5kDQ1CECOk4AuL56HD5q4w8NGR Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="hVk19UMSLaMOpba1OKMkjeSK8rnwVpVLu"; protected-headers="v1" From: Stephen Farrell To: Juliusz Chroboczek Cc: "homenet@ietf.org" Message-ID: <726cad26-76c3-7838-6a8e-3dc4809e50a3@cs.tcd.ie> Subject: Re: [homenet] comments on babel-profile-03 References: <9d3963f1-68a4-6925-f8b5-282be6f15787@cs.tcd.ie> <87y3n2ntig.wl-jch@irif.fr> In-Reply-To: <87y3n2ntig.wl-jch@irif.fr> --hVk19UMSLaMOpba1OKMkjeSK8rnwVpVLu Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hiya, On 19/11/17 16:05, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: >> I re-read babel-profile-03 and have a few comments (below) offered >> as a WG participant (i.e. chair hat off) as part of WGLC. >=20 > Thanks, this is appreciated. >=20 >> - Req5: Is "MUST be... of a similar magnitude..." clear enough? >=20 > Yes. Minor tweaks to metrics don't cause suboptimal routing -- if > one router vendor chooses 64 as the cose of a wired link, and another > uses 96, then one hop is still preferred to two hops, which is what > matters at the end. >=20 > On the other hand, if one router vendor picks a cost of 1 and another > one chooses 256, then bad routing will occur. Here, the costs are > not of similar magnitude. >=20 > The reason we don't want to be too precise here is that we want to=20 > encourage vendors to experiment with smarter out-of-the-box metrics. > For example, a vendor that cares about powerline ethernet should be > allowed to do something smart to prefer Ethernet to powerline. I've no problem with some vagueness in this case, but combining that with a MUST may cause various folks to argue that a MUST needs to be clear enough that one can determine if some code complies or not and that the current text doesn't do that. Others may argue that this is a bogus use of 2119's MUST as it doesn't affect interop. Regardless of the above, my own approach would be to avoid the argument by not using a MUST if it's not really needed for interop or security. >=20 >> - 2.2: I'm not sure this entire section is useful. If there is=20 >> something specific we'd like to avoid (at a MUST NOT or NOT=20 >> RECOMMENDED level), it'd be better to say exactly what. >=20 > "Non-recommendations" are just MAYs. Perhaps the term is badly > chosen, if you have a better suggestion, I'm listening. I'd suggest just dropping the 2.x and 3.x headings. (And maybe change NR1 to OPTION1 or something.) While the meaning of 2.1 and 3.1 is clear, 2.2 and 3.2 are, I think, confusing. But if nobody else finds that confusing, then better to ignore me. >=20 > What this section says is basically "if you want to be smart, that's > cool, but if you're in a rush, don't bother, it's not expected to be=20 > particularly useful in a home network". Let me know if you have=20 > suggestions to make it clearer. >=20 >> - NR2: I don't see the point of that. If >=20 > See above. The point here is the rationale -- we're explaining why > the smarter metric computation algorithms are not going to matter in > a home network. >=20 >> - section 3: "...using the existing redistribution mechanisms"=20 >> could maybe do with a reference for seme well known OS. >=20 > I think redistribution is a standard term -- it's used by Quagga and > by Cisco, at least. Sorry, I didn't mean a reference defining the term but rather a reference to a non-HNCP way in which routes get installed in some relevant OS. That'd also help a bit with the security stuff below I think, (but we might not agree about that), as it means that the set of risks related to routes to be considered here is not limited to those risks that can be realised via HNCP, but needs to ack the other ways in which routes can be installed into an OS. >=20 >> - NR3: I don't see what is not required here, that seems like a=20 >> straightforward 2119 MAY statement >=20 > Yes. See above. >=20 >> - section 4: "only susceptible" seems like overstatment. If babel >> picks up routes from the OS and then annouces those, >=20 > [...] >=20 >> - section 4: "secured at a lower layer" includes links with no=20 >> security (in reality), is that right? >=20 > [...] >=20 >> - section 4: "trusted X" is not a good term unless you say who/what >> is trusting whom/what for what. So, s/trusted links/links/ would be >> better. >=20 > [...] >=20 >> - section 4: The security properties here seem to be directly and >> wholly dependent on nodes being able to safely identify interfaces >> into the categories in 5.1 of 7788. I need to do some more reading >> to convince myself that that's a good thing to assume. >=20 > [...] >=20 >> If there are weaknesses in that assumption, then it'd be better to >> call those out here, >=20 > [...] >=20 >> - section 4: I dislike the plan of assuming lower layer security >=20 > [...] >=20 > You're right on all counts, as usual. However, this document is > called "Homenet Babel Profile", it's not called "Security > Considerations for the Homenet Protocol Suite". Nonetheless there are security considerations arising and IETF processes (whatever one thinks of them), do call for those to be documented. >=20 > I think the right thing to do would be to replace all of Section 4 > with a single sentence that says I don't agree. (I bet you guessed:-) While I am not arguing that this document needs to document a way of running babel in a homenet in some more highly secure manner, you do need to call out the risks I think, and I don't think that that's currently been done quite right yet. In this case I think the current text is nearly ok. I'd say there are a few wording things as mentioned above that could be better, and two substantive additions to make: 1) to recognise that any bogusly installed route (via HNCP or not) is a risk and 2) that security here depends on the HNCP interface type identification being done correctly, which we know has risks/imperfections. (I'd be happy to chat about detailed words for the above if that's useful - could be done offline bringing text back to the list.) >=20 > "This document describes the profile of Babel that is implement in=20 > Homenet implementations and the interaction between HNCP and Babel. > It does not in any way change the security properties of those two > protocols." >=20 > and let somebody competent write another document, called "Security=20 > Considerations for the Homenet Protocol Suite". Is that a plan? It might be a good plan to do that in addition, I'm not sure. Whether or not such a document is a good plan or not will depend on a few things (capable editors with time, the WG reaching consensus and on that consensus being feasible and effective etc.) Cheers, S. PS: Since we've gotten into commenting on this and will hopefully chat more, I think it'll be best if Barbara calls consensus on the results from this thread, be that doing something or nothing. >=20 > -- Juliusz >=20 > _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list=20 > homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet >=20 --hVk19UMSLaMOpba1OKMkjeSK8rnwVpVLu-- --3gs3qLW5kDQ1CECOk4AuL56HD5q4w8NGR Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJaEhk8AAoJEC88hzaAX42iQKMIAKU4JwGdh54gqSiT6Dtip8rg kPIMlHs3e/akpOms3rvptIpiObK2xQ5hOEcqHjTRPiX4qoLTHFHQwdWFVTT3g8Ru UAIx2800zg7PCb+Z9HfbuCNZdTHLwmvOYETV0JN6lJ2D3gq1tMfIZ0AOGZ77ldiA aEAHJ/0mrznDBYLqhG7kkGDW6Xz8nHTVK3AVbqifOnybZK3uHXo5O7QFPaTsBtby ydWm3xImlQKv4z6oRDLI7vaiV4fO6StyJo9I62pzw7oIqke3itd7c0aZJEPKDEXd yRbu3YP9UnjUBUhv20M0JYpX7VcQU6wv1/l1Ki1Yz5pNos6o7lvOeUouaFJ/rho= =Vfvw -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --3gs3qLW5kDQ1CECOk4AuL56HD5q4w8NGR-- From nobody Mon Nov 20 03:24:53 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56F8712954C for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 03:24:53 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.401 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.401 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.8, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 sz_fIrcXXegS for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 03:24:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.157.136]) (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 303AD127010 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 03:24:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0083689.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0083689.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.16.0.21/8.16.0.21) with SMTP id vAKBFrJ1023946 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 06:24:51 -0500 Received: from alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp6.sbc.com [144.160.229.23]) by m0083689.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 2ebnw1j0k7-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 06:24:51 -0500 Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id vAKBOoAd019886 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 06:24:50 -0500 Received: from alpi134.aldc.att.com (alpi134.aldc.att.com [130.8.217.4]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id vAKBOg90019811 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 06:24:43 -0500 Received: from GAALPA1MSGHUBAD.ITServices.sbc.com (GAALPA1MSGHUBAD.itservices.sbc.com [130.8.218.153]) by alpi134.aldc.att.com (RSA Interceptor) for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:24:22 GMT Received: from GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com ([169.254.5.227]) by GAALPA1MSGHUBAD.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.8.218.153]) with mapi id 14.03.0361.001; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 06:24:21 -0500 From: "STARK, BARBARA H" To: "homenet@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: homenet-babel-profile: references Thread-Index: AdNgqpfbFCL3+zwAR6KaEH8jIb8Pig== Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:24:21 +0000 Message-ID: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DCBB53D@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [130.10.221.241] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-RSA-Inspected: yes X-RSA-Classifications: public X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2017-11-20_06:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1709140000 definitions=main-1711200155 Archived-At: Subject: [homenet] homenet-babel-profile: references X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:24:53 -0000 Here is a set of comments related just to references in homenet-babel-profi= le. Barbara The first 4 references to the "Babel routing protocol" spec are to [RFC6126= bis]. All subsequent mentions are to RFC 6126. RFC 6126 is not included as = a reference in the References section. I find this disconcerting, and don't= understand why requirements are against 6126 while introductory paragraphs= proclaim 6126bis to be the protocol spec. Since 6126bis is expected to obsolete 6126, I think it would be best to pic= k one of these two and consistently reference just the one. If we expect 61= 26bis to continue without issues through its WGLC and beyond (so it is roug= hly on the same timeline for completion), then 6126bis would probably be th= e better choice. The two docs could get assigned neighboring numbers. But i= f we want to prevent the 6126bis timeline from creating a publication depen= dency for homenet-babel-profile, then we could just stick with 6126. When 6= 126bis obsoletes 6126, any reference to 6126 will automatically be understo= od as then being to 6126bis. Since this draft is proposed as Experimental, = I suspect either would be ok, but leave it to those more knowledgeable than= I to say for sure. If 6126bis, then I suggest changing the reference name from [RFC6126bis] to= something like [BABEL-PROTOCOL]. Then replace all cases of "RFC 6126" with= [BABEL-PROTOCOL]. And the one instance of "RFC 6126 Babel" would also beco= me [BABEL-PROTOCOL]. If 6126, then change the reference to RFC 6126. It can be named either [BAB= EL-PROTOCOL] or [RFC6126]. Replace all instances of "RFC 6126bis", "[RFC612= 6bis]", "RFC 6126" as appropriate. If 6126, do you also need a mention of R= FC 7557 somewhere? If you choose to go with a friendly name for the 6126(bis) reference, consi= der also friendly-naming RFC 7788 to something like [HNCP] and RFC 7298 to = [BABEL-HMAC].=20 Since babel-source-specific is normative and not yet published, it will hol= d up publication of this doc. In which case waiting for 6126bis may not be= an issue, since 6126bis appears to be timewise ahead of babel-source-speci= fic. draft-chouasne-babel-tos-specific-00 may also cause issues, even though it = is just informational. You may want to consider removing the reference so i= t doesn't create issues. From nobody Mon Nov 20 03:35:52 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B696129549 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 03:35:51 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.621 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.621 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 OaPmopM561aP for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 03:35:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.149.140]) (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 135B912951C for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 03:35:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0049287.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0049287.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.16.0.21/8.16.0.21) with SMTP id vAKBZ2o1047194 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 06:35:48 -0500 Received: from alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp6.sbc.com [144.160.229.23]) by m0049287.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 2ebv9fju0b-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 06:35:47 -0500 Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id vAKBZkRv031814 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 06:35:46 -0500 Received: from alpi132.aldc.att.com (alpi132.aldc.att.com [130.8.217.2]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id vAKBZhAB031803 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 06:35:43 -0500 Received: from GAALPA1MSGHUBAG.ITServices.sbc.com (GAALPA1MSGHUBAG.itservices.sbc.com [130.8.218.156]) by alpi132.aldc.att.com (RSA Interceptor) for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:35:26 GMT Received: from GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com ([169.254.5.227]) by GAALPA1MSGHUBAG.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.8.218.156]) with mapi id 14.03.0361.001; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 06:35:26 -0500 From: "STARK, BARBARA H" To: "homenet@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: homenet-babel-profile: status experimental? Thread-Index: AdNh8mmbbWuDoHtTRryGOOU8YYi2KQ== Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:35:24 +0000 Message-ID: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DCBB5AC@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [130.10.221.241] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-RSA-Inspected: yes X-RSA-Classifications: public X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2017-11-20_06:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=1 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1709140000 definitions=main-1711200159 Archived-At: Subject: [homenet] homenet-babel-profile: status experimental? X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:35:51 -0000 One of the most frequent comments I see for drafts post-WGLC is "why did yo= u choose status x for your draft?". So I'd like for the WG to consciously a= gree on the status to be used for homenet-babel-profile. Currently the draft has intended status of "Experimental". Given the intended status of 6126bis is Standards Track (and HNCP (RFC 7788= ) is also Standards Track), would it make sense to make homenet-babel-profi= le Standards Track as well? This question does depend on which Babel spec homenet-babel-profile will re= ference (6126 or 6126bis). [I sent a separate email with comments related t= o references.] If homenet-babel-profile is going to use 6126 as its spec re= ference, then Experimental probably would make more sense. Barbara From nobody Mon Nov 20 09:02:12 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A236E129C29 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 09:02:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.401 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.401 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.8, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 NaLHyo6HBUvl for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 09:02:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.157.136]) (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 D2B12129C1E for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 09:01:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0049463.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0049463.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.16.0.21/8.16.0.21) with SMTP id vAKGumX2007026 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 12:01:47 -0500 Received: from alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp6.sbc.com [144.160.229.23]) by m0049463.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 2ec30ur4xr-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 12:01:45 -0500 Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id vAKH1iNO005611 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 12:01:44 -0500 Received: from alpi132.aldc.att.com (alpi132.aldc.att.com [130.8.217.2]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id vAKH1ddS005523 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 12:01:39 -0500 Received: from GAALPA1MSGHUBAE.ITServices.sbc.com (GAALPA1MSGHUBAE.itservices.sbc.com [130.8.218.154]) by alpi132.aldc.att.com (RSA Interceptor) for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 17:01:20 GMT Received: from GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com ([169.254.5.227]) by GAALPA1MSGHUBAE.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.8.218.154]) with mapi id 14.03.0361.001; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 12:01:19 -0500 From: "STARK, BARBARA H" To: "homenet@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: homenet-babel-profile: determining link type Thread-Index: AdNiIApsfbuUCpDIRyufc7cyC1BJtw== Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 17:01:18 +0000 Message-ID: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DCBBF72@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [130.10.221.241] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-RSA-Inspected: yes X-RSA-Classifications: public X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2017-11-20_09:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1709140000 definitions=main-1711200228 Archived-At: Subject: [homenet] homenet-babel-profile: determining link type X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 17:02:12 -0000 Hi Juliusz, Not as chair.... I have a question about the following requirement: REQ6: a Homenet implementation of Babel SHOULD distinguish between wired and wireless links ; if it is unable to determine whether a link is wired or wireless, it SHOULD make the worst-case hypothesis that the link is wireless. It SHOULD dynamically probe the quality of wireless links and derive a suitable metric from its quality estimation. The algorithm described in Appendix A of RFC 6126 MAY be used. Some older powerline technologies perform worse than Wi-Fi. But since power= line is "wired", this requirement suggests it would be preferred. Also, it's not uncommon to use Wi-Fi to Ethernet or powerline bridges in ho= me networks. A router attached to Ethernet that is subsequently bridged to = Wi-Fi would look to the router like a wired link. Should we really only suggest that the router dynamically probe the quality= of wireless links? Or would it make sense to suggest dynamic probing of al= l links, because assuming the entire path between 2 routers uses a single p= hysical layer technology may not be a good assumption? Barbara From nobody Mon Nov 20 09:53:05 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0E5912DDD2 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 09:53:04 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=steffann.nl 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 V1iaKer1Rgbw for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 09:53:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.sintact.nl (mail.sintact.nl [IPv6:2001:9e0:803::6]) (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 A2E44129A97 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 09:53:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.sintact.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EE924A; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 18:53:00 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=steffann.nl; h= x-mailer:references:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:date :date:in-reply-to:from:from:subject:subject:mime-version :content-type:content-type:received:received; s=mail; t= 1511200377; bh=EfjjcIjmRS1yCV8Vd/BbAgKgTjwGZvvUtMh9+DTx1Y0=; b=P KVlTNOd4mmPTGFQ2aUK3Qts+0qRv/Jh12NvXR0wmHo+CEHqzuvPWvHv+usIiZclT RvNtFlVMccw9l9M5KMxN2GL+vp4KzMtfogKP9eRMr7746BLRz4XLNsUdpmX6B98Y 7tBQVZZ1H2h1BIYxIDWA8LfIu3HIvHEyNEZtWCTRtg= X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.sintact.nl Received: from mail.sintact.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.sintact.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id 5kz7wQ23TitE; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 18:52:57 +0100 (CET) Received: from [IPv6:2a02:a213:a301:1000:1870:840f:3342:39a3] (unknown [IPv6:2a02:a213:a301:1000:1870:840f:3342:39a3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail.sintact.nl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 289DB49; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 18:52:57 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.1 \(3445.4.7\)) X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett From: Sander Steffann In-Reply-To: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DCBBF72@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 18:52:55 +0100 Cc: "homenet@ietf.org" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DCBBF72@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> To: "STARK, BARBARA H" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.4.7) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [homenet] homenet-babel-profile: determining link type X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 17:53:04 -0000 Hi Barbara, > Should we really only suggest that the router dynamically probe the = quality of wireless links? Or would it make sense to suggest dynamic = probing of all links, because assuming the entire path between 2 routers = uses a single physical layer technology may not be a good assumption? Good point. My gut feeling is that the percentage of cases where that = assumption would be wrong is small but significant enough that we should = consider probing all links. Anybody with better (=3Dany) data? Cheers, Sander From nobody Mon Nov 20 11:18:37 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9998612EA42 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:18:35 -0800 (PST) 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=mathemainzel.info 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 ESNLQK1zD002 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:18:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from vhost01.ipv6help.de (vhost01.ipv6help.de [IPv6:2a03:4000:1c:49d:0:7648:6f73:7431]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5ACE12E957 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:18:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from home.mail (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by vhost01.ipv6help.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0E70F4064F; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 20:18:31 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 vhost01.ipv6help.de 0E70F4064F DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mathemainzel.info; s=mail; t=1511205511; bh=GbsImoNHfqAltS+imCVyT4ZZ8ugjCcQqqzNQ3KJQkHE=; h=Message-ID:Date:From:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:Content-Type: From; b=sGGTqlGDZbTdLxlsrgzlynh94NGbvtHvrYHjLHwZq8UiC6ny6myEc5l4k1qg5ohxT RyinIaShWHPJwmtdZlH3Sd5HinopImGffosu74HWKKvdjn3bngZFenwuzc/qDvgzuS FVH5jj+keSQv+I7exrQZ1S6uQdJdYuomXI9E+Bf8= Message-ID: <5A132A82.9020609@mathemainzel.info> Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 20:18:26 +0100 From: "Walter H." Organization: Home User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (UNIX; U; Cray X-MP/48; en-US; rv:2.70) Gecko/20110929 Communicator/7.20 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: homenet@ietf.org CC: Ted Lemon References: <150428805872.6417.9525310755360551475@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <150428805872.6417.9525310755360551475@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1; boundary="------------ms080307090804010103040800" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [homenet] I-D Action: draft-ietf-homenet-dot-14.txt X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 19:18:35 -0000 This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format. --------------ms080307090804010103040800 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello, has this draft already become a RFC? Thanks, Walter On 01.09.2017 19:47, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote: > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts dire= ctories. > This draft is a work item of the Home Networking WG of the IETF. > > Title : Special Use Domain 'home.arpa.' > Authors : Pierre Pfister > Ted Lemon > Filename : draft-ietf-homenet-dot-14.txt > Pages : 11 > Date : 2017-09-01 > > Abstract: > This document specifies the behavior that is expected from the Doma= in > Name System with regard to DNS queries for names ending with > '.home.arpa.', and designates this domain as a special-use domain > name. 'home.arpa.' is designated for non-unique use in residential > home networks. Home Networking Control Protocol (HNCP) is updated = to > use the 'home.arpa.' domain instead of '.home'. > > > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-homenet-dot/ > > There are also htmlized versions available at: > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-homenet-dot-14 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-homenet-dot-14 > > A diff from the previous version is available at: > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-homenet-dot-14 > > > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submi= ssion > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ --------------ms080307090804010103040800 Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" Content-Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAQAAoIIKBDCC BOgwggPQoAMCAQICDkgbagkTvYAkyl0i8BTzMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBCwUAMEwxIDAeBgNVBAsT F0dsb2JhbFNpZ24gUm9vdCBDQSAtIFIzMRMwEQYDVQQKEwpHbG9iYWxTaWduMRMwEQYDVQQD EwpHbG9iYWxTaWduMB4XDTE2MDYxNTAwMDAwMFoXDTI0MDYxNTAwMDAwMFowXTELMAkGA1UE BhMCQkUxGTAXBgNVBAoTEEdsb2JhbFNpZ24gbnYtc2ExMzAxBgNVBAMTKkdsb2JhbFNpZ24g UGVyc29uYWxTaWduIDIgQ0EgLSBTSEEyNTYgLSBHMzCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADggEP ADCCAQoCggEBALaWaJNl/SwB7GKjDVS/i8ukQ5Gimq+xg/K1bW/Z8OrczxZ71xnjhAOF+cYf cI8fbEnFaRkecJE4NX4CSF05axhEpmqlyHT0XfWEPmMfcUSCCD7tyaf26W4mQSmAyUm6/9l2 oKO7G/Z530so00p7nFHCD2VQoZ+oSp3lRgSNg0/cssg9z5ghCZhMwPGPeqk/NyZlR9hmj0km wsNAvmY9bP86rSlG8BOc4fLrmaeLwtNfUG2iDm/HBpc4L06hjkcCtIMA2KTjukEHYOXdN1ry B8E7p5yXaC6376lINrzpaaiZqkfpx/ZR0vmxLLbFSbWYnlNT2vty83wP+HE+1wP6Z8MCAwEA AaOCAbUwggGxMA4GA1UdDwEB/wQEAwIBBjBqBgNVHSUEYzBhBggrBgEFBQcDAgYIKwYBBQUH AwQGCCsGAQUFBwMJBgorBgEEAYI3FAICBgorBgEEAYI3CgMEBgkrBgEEAYI3FQYGCisGAQQB gjcKAwwGCCsGAQUFBwMHBggrBgEFBQcDETASBgNVHRMBAf8ECDAGAQH/AgEAMB0GA1UdDgQW BBRpcoJiMWeVRIV3kYDEBDZJnXsLYTAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBSP8Et/qC5FJK5NUPpjmove4t0b vDA+BggrBgEFBQcBAQQyMDAwLgYIKwYBBQUHMAGGImh0dHA6Ly9vY3NwMi5nbG9iYWxzaWdu LmNvbS9yb290cjMwNgYDVR0fBC8wLTAroCmgJ4YlaHR0cDovL2NybC5nbG9iYWxzaWduLmNv bS9yb290LXIzLmNybDBnBgNVHSAEYDBeMAsGCSsGAQQBoDIBKDAMBgorBgEEAaAyASgKMEEG CSsGAQQBoDIBXzA0MDIGCCsGAQUFBwIBFiZodHRwczovL3d3dy5nbG9iYWxzaWduLmNvbS9y ZXBvc2l0b3J5LzANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQsFAAOCAQEAqJ3NMsx8Z+ILUNelXHCjZuIl7+q0tlMw bocSN1wz4sIoVuOTvUWV81jYFXFM8+SCiRS+/qXMR73rBlSCPua/vvXqiPV5xCgiC4x69g4L 4yquSZoOm8In8my2G1VKAbYZ4WhQdFi8EkUYT67eXhsTMOdVJjSAov4UigSrB4RhUhGiUAC2 cuBy9BFnbhOiC2AI1+gUl0Q7RxXlD3XW+On+R3+a8yExi7J/QSKaDla4EvO/DuCZ31FkItvc gX5++R2o4nxbzwvrqp/q3FZ766S4LCzmBv+uJFl/xUR/PpoVXvpnEl98bFKXMSvavby01ba6 FP8iVJhAuDnB+XULGxwaozCCBRQwggP8oAMCAQICDDf7Me/cd27Vi+FlDzANBgkqhkiG9w0B AQsFADBdMQswCQYDVQQGEwJCRTEZMBcGA1UEChMQR2xvYmFsU2lnbiBudi1zYTEzMDEGA1UE AxMqR2xvYmFsU2lnbiBQZXJzb25hbFNpZ24gMiBDQSAtIFNIQTI1NiAtIEczMB4XDTE3MDQy NDEwNDQxOFoXDTIwMDQyNDEwNDQxOFowVTELMAkGA1UEBhMCQVQxGzAZBgNVBAMTEldhbHRl ciBIb2VobGh1Ym1lcjEpMCcGCSqGSIb3DQEJARYad2FsdGVyLmhAbWF0aGVtYWluemVsLmlu Zm8wggEiMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4IBDwAwggEKAoIBAQDROn0wc2eBzHcRoKiSnUFz1H4T SN5QEKhssd+B8F0YMDxEzXyvnOeCLAN+8+ui/fyZ0g1A8qgWIGkerNeJJgVes9Xf5EpemE5b zksNPIoVQVB7sBfWezlJ6E12FUNssdLdcQlVqNtFnHtfZV0SD0BS87mW5GL75Ay8XpSkwwTV 6XpIAcKRyd7EFCw+7g2Udp/ZAjPZ4X7oZl8sFFlOClPvWu8LCjbnDcWHpE93QeXnmMx86LQg tACrTy1PDX0yAOeCTan6F3sX0tz5Cp8sWduQiMaKof8yxW/t2V7BJwXhZhiDhax3y/AFREOH NC5dJ2w1sFiwidK7sljogU7/orGHAgMBAAGjggHaMIIB1jAOBgNVHQ8BAf8EBAMCBaAwgZ4G CCsGAQUFBwEBBIGRMIGOME0GCCsGAQUFBzAChkFodHRwOi8vc2VjdXJlLmdsb2JhbHNpZ24u Y29tL2NhY2VydC9nc3BlcnNvbmFsc2lnbjJzaGEyZzNvY3NwLmNydDA9BggrBgEFBQcwAYYx aHR0cDovL29jc3AyLmdsb2JhbHNpZ24uY29tL2dzcGVyc29uYWxzaWduMnNoYTJnMzBMBgNV HSAERTBDMEEGCSsGAQQBoDIBKDA0MDIGCCsGAQUFBwIBFiZodHRwczovL3d3dy5nbG9iYWxz aWduLmNvbS9yZXBvc2l0b3J5LzAJBgNVHRMEAjAAMEQGA1UdHwQ9MDswOaA3oDWGM2h0dHA6 Ly9jcmwuZ2xvYmFsc2lnbi5jb20vZ3NwZXJzb25hbHNpZ24yc2hhMmczLmNybDAlBgNVHREE HjAcgRp3YWx0ZXIuaEBtYXRoZW1haW56ZWwuaW5mbzAdBgNVHSUEFjAUBggrBgEFBQcDAgYI KwYBBQUHAwQwHQYDVR0OBBYEFOQybe9sZCmROEwJqrOUU1qsTrgqMB8GA1UdIwQYMBaAFGly gmIxZ5VEhXeRgMQENkmdewthMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBCwUAA4IBAQBY5Zn+1HTT58xtZQgu1IcN UI9t2PC0ps6sELyN3eCBvqYiqk5D8J58hNl9j0hnht5oM0aKVgTL1GNFu6J9DDd3Bk2sNmG6 8uIvo0NsJAFk23lMzKt+YOm3C6+oveuxICFhHeiTxn9z2jLfU+xYLg8UXpSl5U6m0uZcVoLA YYYhLgpaSM8jNYgAv8U2NVK+f8hd4AVEpwyF2edKbZTAdj/iDmjmOm9lkUIzacemNR8DRxiD Eb2XTZa5pcrsPOe1bisJ5wcHoIx+217fm8WJF7Vk2amB9fg8AM3cGU7V7D2Ynbg5tJdV5Et6 ff+sk9Fv1HRaFDqKQVorlDY1P5h1HsoxMYIDYTCCA10CAQEwbTBdMQswCQYDVQQGEwJCRTEZ MBcGA1UEChMQR2xvYmFsU2lnbiBudi1zYTEzMDEGA1UEAxMqR2xvYmFsU2lnbiBQZXJzb25h bFNpZ24gMiBDQSAtIFNIQTI1NiAtIEczAgw3+zHv3Hdu1YvhZQ8wCQYFKw4DAhoFAKCCAckw GAYJKoZIhvcNAQkDMQsGCSqGSIb3DQEHATAcBgkqhkiG9w0BCQUxDxcNMTcxMTIwMTkxODI2 WjAjBgkqhkiG9w0BCQQxFgQUtfBbB1RiEhG3uqP+Bg7cpYaopuYwbAYJKoZIhvcNAQkPMV8w XTALBglghkgBZQMEASowCwYJYIZIAWUDBAECMAoGCCqGSIb3DQMHMA4GCCqGSIb3DQMCAgIA gDANBggqhkiG9w0DAgIBQDAHBgUrDgMCBzANBggqhkiG9w0DAgIBKDB8BgkrBgEEAYI3EAQx bzBtMF0xCzAJBgNVBAYTAkJFMRkwFwYDVQQKExBHbG9iYWxTaWduIG52LXNhMTMwMQYDVQQD EypHbG9iYWxTaWduIFBlcnNvbmFsU2lnbiAyIENBIC0gU0hBMjU2IC0gRzMCDDf7Me/cd27V i+FlDzB+BgsqhkiG9w0BCRACCzFvoG0wXTELMAkGA1UEBhMCQkUxGTAXBgNVBAoTEEdsb2Jh bFNpZ24gbnYtc2ExMzAxBgNVBAMTKkdsb2JhbFNpZ24gUGVyc29uYWxTaWduIDIgQ0EgLSBT SEEyNTYgLSBHMwIMN/sx79x3btWL4WUPMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUABIIBAD6VWSw7nOzD5w7C SUDbb8++Dp7na2aS+raCtNuKD2YzJQut+Of5F5ggD3vCYoEMUZU7hO3iM3QElLy73pQL0cB3 hfh+jlssFRi7WXu9LqHz7rWMMIsW/T0ddw0LrPbd5XvYG3osuTeAs10BCQt0Yt+8eXHEE2Ns yb0ZHPMv5mXRv5Im3UjTIm9qlJqhWN9TBACqPAI69lOB4hGsn0UVj1rh70/Ap2ngsetrU4pg ZKp3yx3syhDL2aM+RpmpzhdTvp+jiXbz1XOwjSEsASMyDvj3I+qQBdGbMCz6SOEENu34w+z0 zVWyX/VVoz9dcx8kiUZfhHkFcMnzyjSXWaGcUTcAAAAAAAA= --------------ms080307090804010103040800-- From nobody Mon Nov 20 11:33:06 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DAAF12EA7C for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:33:04 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com 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 C2DPFetZ90RJ for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:33:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-qk0-x232.google.com (mail-qk0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A120812EA55 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:33:02 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qk0-x232.google.com with SMTP id n3so8889263qkn.11 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:33:02 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=e7Xxef2tck0KdBknUXAqPTz08eo8hm7iimhfcseEftI=; b=17AlUzG5ry5i65pzkWQasEbE0tMyJhN6y0QW/zFAydG+Y7Z/Qrww+rTH5ADJ8OYMvc u5WlV945jQfwbKv0/DT6fduQ5l61q2xLwgNN3zSByjputF84hblKThSKwRLJW5tozpYq LIcSH3MzJVBcp1ckZsJvvKYug9YQTdvg/ru0wk2hjre6OqUZpMCz1lkNl1YE8RpAVMJw BZkQY7znaOCoSnghSpbzrMZbReCa4ZDgM7Kdro5w3j9wxTytgHUIioCPKwoA4Lg/IXGT n11Qok+dRw6M2MmQ8Ah/P7qNEynmswCj20Y7V2oDg6WrGVnz+HJpEcLePgp63LsjeE0R d6zg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=e7Xxef2tck0KdBknUXAqPTz08eo8hm7iimhfcseEftI=; b=NuqpkK3CHIeONX9Esuk1ZcsGUgsicwllVlsy0Dbt5pbSXhWJoj43MSY4uzBU5UjGpr tueG1MHcLyS+SLgZeJFKEvqzqnpbWzVKtv5BsUw6tc3SYV7bPNarv/+tB3GlXmnKsdM1 SNnB0ZBWhfzkjEiwwM8a7pi3hlFdMslMgUylq6BogvaGPTgvK1Z5yghn4xZgwfGSjoEa k1Av8EK1Ti3oCLDcEyJ83TnbbpbcMW19q+EbFc121HS67aJBA5c3ksgXDaXcOjmRB3Wg +4W5x15nvKZCalQWf3irJZ/WY+4D+H9H6JywZ1zT7dh8ttBi8QnhHUHSHsuL9EHGEsbx wq5A== X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX4tM3pJKw56z6uVzlUFGhXMoszw/Vjd7aoI1kvAauR7VPwnN0JT Bj8KRF6rQA5sA26jJPA9FC6SqKVehMI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMapg8cGQJUmvFNKkLwYp5WTl3xgD61JZ2CgmTdNk5cJ73M8tN8oF7lLk3j1N4ti7b9GN2R/3A== X-Received: by 10.55.97.135 with SMTP id v129mr9255481qkb.305.1511206381795; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:33:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from cavall.lan (c-24-60-163-103.hsd1.nh.comcast.net. [24.60.163.103]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n145sm7443598qke.38.2017.11.20.11.32.58 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:32:58 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.1 \(3445.4.7\)) From: Ted Lemon In-Reply-To: <5A132A82.9020609@mathemainzel.info> Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 14:32:57 -0500 Cc: homenet@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <0106C294-ED64-4296-B213-E7D9F754B615@fugue.com> References: <150428805872.6417.9525310755360551475@ietfa.amsl.com> <5A132A82.9020609@mathemainzel.info> To: "Walter H." X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.4.7) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [homenet] I-D Action: draft-ietf-homenet-dot-14.txt X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 19:33:04 -0000 On Nov 20, 2017, at 2:18 PM, Walter H. = wrote: > has this draft already become a RFC? It appears to be blocking on an IANA action. Dunno what the status is. = It's definitely approved for publication. From nobody Mon Nov 20 11:53:21 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF26812EA97 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:53:18 -0800 (PST) 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 u3vlDLRNpxfz for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:53:17 -0800 (PST) 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 2795312EAA7 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:53:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id vAKJrCdi006680; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 20:53:12 +0100 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61056EB21F; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 20:53:12 +0100 (CET) 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 cxLe5_1OnoE7; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 20:53:11 +0100 (CET) Received: from trurl.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AED11EB217; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 20:53:10 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 20:53:10 +0100 Message-ID: <87h8tog21l.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: "STARK, BARBARA H" Cc: "homenet@ietf.org" In-Reply-To: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DCBB53D@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> References: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DCBB53D@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> 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 [194.254.61.138]); Mon, 20 Nov 2017 20:53:12 +0100 (CET) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5A1332A8.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5A1332A8.000 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 : 5A1332A8.000 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [homenet] homenet-babel-profile: references X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 19:53:19 -0000 Thanks, Barbara. > The first 4 references to the "Babel routing protocol" spec are to > [RFC6126bis]. All subsequent mentions are to RFC 6126. Changed to 6126bis throughout. Since Homenet depends on source-specific, and source-specific depends on mandatory bits, Homenet cannot be implemented with just 6126. > If 6126bis, then I suggest changing the reference name from [RFC6126bis] > to something like [BABEL-PROTOCOL]. [...] > If you choose to go with a friendly name for the 6126(bis) reference, > consider also friendly-naming RFC 7788 to something like [HNCP] and RFC > 7298 to [BABEL-HMAC]. I've previously been chastised for the opposite (using friendly names instead of the RFC numbers), so I'm leaving it as it is right now. If you're sure of yourself, I'll be glad to change to friendly names. > draft-chouasne-babel-tos-specific-00 may also cause issues, even though > it is just informational. You may want to consider removing the > reference so it doesn't create issues. Ok. -- Juliusz From nobody Mon Nov 20 11:54:24 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB98612EA97 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:54:22 -0800 (PST) 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 pDaFiGy4Oz2j for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:54:21 -0800 (PST) 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 96C421204DA for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:54:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id vAKJsGD7006947; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 20:54:17 +0100 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02A95EB365; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 20:54:17 +0100 (CET) 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 6nlGjlp1jUya; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 20:54:16 +0100 (CET) Received: from trurl.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 29826EB364; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 20:54:16 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 20:54:16 +0100 Message-ID: <87efosg1zr.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: "STARK, BARBARA H" Cc: "homenet@ietf.org" In-Reply-To: <87h8tog21l.wl-jch@irif.fr> References: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DCBB53D@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> <87h8tog21l.wl-jch@irif.fr> 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 [194.254.61.138]); Mon, 20 Nov 2017 20:54:17 +0100 (CET) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5A1332E8.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5A1332E8.001 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 : 5A1332E8.001 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [homenet] homenet-babel-profile: references X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 19:54:23 -0000 >> draft-chouasne-babel-tos-specific-00 may also cause issues, even though >> it is just informational. You may want to consider removing the >> reference so it doesn't create issues. > Ok. Does the same apply to [BABEL-Z]? From nobody Mon Nov 20 11:55:14 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DABE12EA95 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:55:12 -0800 (PST) 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 rVX8ilNYxj2I for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:55:11 -0800 (PST) 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 3DB2912EA94 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:55:11 -0800 (PST) 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/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id vAKJt6Fw007124 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 20 Nov 2017 20:55:06 +0100 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/relay2/75695) with ESMTP id vAKJt6RY009009; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 20:55:06 +0100 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56237EB21F; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 20:55:06 +0100 (CET) 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 QcmiPRpdaRyi; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 20:55:05 +0100 (CET) Received: from trurl.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8E704EB217; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 20:55:05 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 20:55:05 +0100 Message-ID: <87d14cg1ye.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: "STARK, BARBARA H" Cc: "homenet@ietf.org" In-Reply-To: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DCBB5AC@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> References: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DCBB5AC@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> 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]); Mon, 20 Nov 2017 20:55:06 +0100 (CET) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.141]); Mon, 20 Nov 2017 20:55:06 +0100 (CET) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5A13331A.002 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-Miltered: at potemkin with ID 5A13331A.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5A13331A.002 from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/null/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5A13331A.000 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 : 5A13331A.002 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5A13331A.000 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: Subject: Re: [homenet] homenet-babel-profile: status experimental? X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 19:55:12 -0000 > Currently the draft has intended status of "Experimental". That's what Mark told me to do. > Given the intended status of 6126bis is Standards Track (and HNCP (RFC > 7788) is also Standards Track), would it make sense to make > homenet-babel-profile Standards Track as well? Yes, I think so. > This question does depend on which Babel spec homenet-babel-profile will > reference (6126 or 6126bis). [I sent a separate email with comments > related to references.] If homenet-babel-profile is going to use 6126 as > its spec reference, then Experimental probably would make more sense. It's going to use 6126bis. -- Juliusz From nobody Mon Nov 20 12:05:37 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6899412EA93 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 12:05:36 -0800 (PST) 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 Oj_GCTN0i5E4 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 12:05:35 -0800 (PST) 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 022F3126BF7 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 12:05:34 -0800 (PST) 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/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id vAKK5VJG009486 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 20 Nov 2017 21:05:31 +0100 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/relay2/75695) with ESMTP id vAKK5VO3010953; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 21:05:31 +0100 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26EF2EB21F; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 21:05:31 +0100 (CET) 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 5hO2CDdRI3mv; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 21:05:30 +0100 (CET) Received: from trurl.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3E49FEB217; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 21:05:30 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 21:05:30 +0100 Message-ID: <87bmjwg1h1.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: "STARK, BARBARA H" Cc: "homenet@ietf.org" In-Reply-To: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DCBBF72@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> References: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DCBBF72@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> 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]); Mon, 20 Nov 2017 21:05:31 +0100 (CET) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.141]); Mon, 20 Nov 2017 21:05:31 +0100 (CET) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5A13358B.002 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-Miltered: at potemkin with ID 5A13358B.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5A13358B.002 from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/null/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5A13358B.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 : 5A13358B.002 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5A13358B.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: Subject: Re: [homenet] homenet-babel-profile: determining link type X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 20:05:36 -0000 > REQ6: a Homenet implementation of Babel SHOULD distinguish between > wired and wireless links ; if it is unable to determine whether a link > is wired or wireless, it SHOULD make the worst-case hypothesis that > the link is wireless. It SHOULD dynamically probe the quality of > wireless links and derive a suitable metric from its quality > estimation. The algorithm described in Appendix A of RFC 6126 MAY be > used. > Some older powerline technologies perform worse than Wi-Fi. But since > powerline is "wired", this requirement suggests it would be preferred. Do you have a suggestion for better wording? I guess we could say "lossless wired links" and "potentially lossy links". I'll think about it. > Also, it's not uncommon to use Wi-Fi to Ethernet or powerline bridges in > home networks. A router attached to Ethernet that is subsequently > bridged to Wi-Fi would look to the router like a wired link. Yes, that's a problem for Babel in general, not just for Homenet. It is impossible to reliably determine the layer-2 topology. There are two factors that mitigate the issue: 1. usually, there is a wireless bridge on just one side of a link; if the link is being treated as wireless on the other side, we still end up with a reasonable metric; 2. powerline links are not usually laid up in places where they are redundant; if there's a powerline, it's the only path, and so the metric doesn't matter in the first place. > Should we really only suggest that the router dynamically probe the > quality of wireless links? We only have implementation experience with three categories of links -- lossless, wireless, and tunnels. If we are to suggest a strategy for powerline, we need to do more research. We also need evidence that it makes a difference. > Or would it make sense to suggest dynamic probing of all links, because > assuming the entire path between 2 routers uses a single physical layer > technology may not be a good assumption? Link-quality estimation slows down convergence, so I think we should only suggest it where it makes a difference. For it to make a difference, you need to satisfy two conditions: (1) variable quality links that can be measured and (2) sufficiently diverse paths so that the metric can make you choose different paths. It's easy to get the two to happen with wireless links, much more difficult with powerline. If you have evidence otherwise, I'm interested. -- Juliusz From nobody Mon Nov 20 12:06:32 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04FD71270AE for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 12:06:31 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.62 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.62 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 3LFEz7q7yfqR for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 12:06:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.149.140]) (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 B5FF4126BF7 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 12:06:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0048589.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0048589.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.16.0.21/8.16.0.21) with SMTP id vAKJtMYj035916; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 15:06:28 -0500 Received: from alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp6.sbc.com [144.160.229.23]) by m0048589.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 2ec32sna6r-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 20 Nov 2017 15:06:27 -0500 Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id vAKK6QaG016284; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 15:06:26 -0500 Received: from alpi131.aldc.att.com (alpi131.aldc.att.com [130.8.218.69]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id vAKK6K6G016152 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 20 Nov 2017 15:06:21 -0500 Received: from GAALPA1MSGHUBAA.ITServices.sbc.com (GAALPA1MSGHUBAA.itservices.sbc.com [130.8.218.150]) by alpi131.aldc.att.com (RSA Interceptor); Mon, 20 Nov 2017 20:06:04 GMT Received: from GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com ([169.254.5.227]) by GAALPA1MSGHUBAA.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.8.218.150]) with mapi id 14.03.0361.001; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 15:06:04 -0500 From: "STARK, BARBARA H" To: Juliusz Chroboczek CC: "homenet@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [homenet] homenet-babel-profile: references Thread-Index: AdNgqpfbFCL3+zwAR6KaEH8jIb8PigBuIIQAAAoTzUA= Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 20:06:04 +0000 Message-ID: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DCBC363@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> References: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DCBB53D@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> <87h8tog21l.wl-jch@irif.fr> In-Reply-To: <87h8tog21l.wl-jch@irif.fr> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [130.10.221.241] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-RSA-Inspected: yes X-RSA-Classifications: public X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2017-11-20_11:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1709140000 definitions=main-1711200267 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [homenet] homenet-babel-profile: references X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 20:06:31 -0000 > > If you choose to go with a friendly name for the 6126(bis) reference, > > consider also friendly-naming RFC 7788 to something like [HNCP] and > > RFC > > 7298 to [BABEL-HMAC]. >=20 > I've previously been chastised for the opposite (using friendly names ins= tead > of the RFC numbers), so I'm leaving it as it is right now. If you're sur= e of > yourself, I'll be glad to change to friendly names. My bad. You're right. I found it in the Style Guide that it's supposed to b= e [RFCXXXX]. https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/pdfrfc/rfc7322.txt.pdf=20 Barbara From nobody Mon Nov 20 14:27:31 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 063E312EAE4 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 14:27:31 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.621 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.621 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 0ig3ZLs2rzG7 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 14:27:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.149.140]) (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 F352612EAA8 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 14:27:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0053301.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.21/8.16.0.21) with SMTP id vAKMOxIn006358; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 17:27:28 -0500 Received: from alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp6.sbc.com [144.160.229.23]) by mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2ec57vmh7h-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 20 Nov 2017 17:27:27 -0500 Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id vAKMRORd019859; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 17:27:26 -0500 Received: from alpi131.aldc.att.com (alpi131.aldc.att.com [130.8.218.69]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id vAKMRG4t019526 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 20 Nov 2017 17:27:23 -0500 Received: from GAALPA1MSGHUBAG.ITServices.sbc.com (GAALPA1MSGHUBAG.itservices.sbc.com [130.8.218.156]) by alpi131.aldc.att.com (RSA Interceptor); Mon, 20 Nov 2017 22:26:59 GMT Received: from GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com ([169.254.5.227]) by GAALPA1MSGHUBAG.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.8.218.156]) with mapi id 14.03.0361.001; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 17:26:59 -0500 From: "STARK, BARBARA H" To: Juliusz Chroboczek CC: "homenet@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [homenet] homenet-babel-profile: references Thread-Index: AdNgqpfbFCL3+zwAR6KaEH8jIb8PigBuIIQAAAAJ1QAABgSIgA== Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 22:26:58 +0000 Message-ID: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DCBC6A2@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> References: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DCBB53D@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> <87h8tog21l.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87efosg1zr.wl-jch@irif.fr> In-Reply-To: <87efosg1zr.wl-jch@irif.fr> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [130.10.207.182] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-RSA-Inspected: yes X-RSA-Classifications: public X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2017-11-20_12:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1709140000 definitions=main-1711200301 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [homenet] homenet-babel-profile: references X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 22:27:31 -0000 > >> draft-chouasne-babel-tos-specific-00 may also cause issues, even > >> though it is just informational. You may want to consider removing > >> the reference so it doesn't create issues. >=20 > > Ok. >=20 > Does the same apply to [BABEL-Z]? I see the Style Guide does allow you to reference work in progress in the f= ormat you've used. So I defer to the Style Guide and guess all the informat= ive reference Work in Progress refs are ok. I guess I need to put the RFC S= tyle Guide on my vacation reading list. Barbara From nobody Mon Nov 20 17:02:41 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64F4012EB08 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 17:02:40 -0800 (PST) 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 q-iSC9ULukW6 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 17:02:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 893551201FA for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 17:02:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9127520072; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 20:04:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from obiwan.sandelman.ca (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1111D82B25; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 20:02:37 -0500 (EST) From: Michael Richardson To: "STARK\, BARBARA H" cc: "homenet\@ietf.org" In-Reply-To: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DCBBF72@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> References: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DCBBF72@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.7-RC3; GNU Emacs 24.5.1 X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m Archived-At: Subject: Re: [homenet] homenet-babel-profile: determining link type X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 01:02:40 -0000 --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain STARK, BARBARA H wrote: > Should we really only suggest that the router dynamically probe the > quality of wireless links? Or would it make sense to suggest dynamic > probing of all links, because assuming the entire path between 2 > routers uses a single physical layer technology may not be a good > assumption? I agree that is should probe all interfaces! Some wires might be better than others; assume use of random joiners between cat3,cat5,cat6 and chicken wire in the home. (a booth at N+I back in ~2000 or something had a very nice GbE over barbed wire demo) -- Michael Richardson , Sandelman Software Works -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEbsyLEzg/qUTA43uogItw+93Q3WUFAloTeywACgkQgItw+93Q 3WVR7Af/Zugw8joB/8L3fqkt03olaZvgOziEpllQ4kbYmQy7vyUuFXPct/8Snx0g C6YmH76vssVZ8GP7Xkulxorf626qpP+CFxMEszIfe68+w5wMZgWAXjAZsLjnrWVd TzXnZBvZxLWIzDhvqV42jGSVpCe4fy7S+XOeIil4NVUnPBhanL7HmRoze2JtP/x5 5/cCoWrBn0EQcfw+K2GSt0IixnWuHCqqsc2d1Y3uX0AZPCkcnuuRtdUmNwSFIRsQ gRDbTpowPQrNzBoifMXn+cc5V7MvEXRsE6pm96t8IrLFkIObjdxBXOHyOX2SSG+n bk/e3Efh9bSz+f0vbOSF8MXAWbQibg== =6cDM -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=-- From nobody Tue Nov 21 04:29:40 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F146312947B for ; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 04:29:38 -0800 (PST) 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 Qi8cSmYOGUi8 for ; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 04:29:37 -0800 (PST) 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 1177612946E for ; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 04:29:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id vALCTWbK029173; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 13:29:32 +0100 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89757EB217; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 13:29:32 +0100 (CET) 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 BiCCzI_uTZXh; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 13:29:31 +0100 (CET) Received: from lanthane.pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr (unknown [172.23.36.54]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 60EACEB216; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 13:29:31 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lanthane.irif.fr) by lanthane.pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1eH7gA-00085S-VT; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 13:29:31 +0100 Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 13:29:30 +0100 Message-ID: <7i7euj4xxx.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: Michael Richardson Cc: "STARK, BARBARA H" , "homenet@ietf.org" In-Reply-To: <22889.1511226157@obiwan.sandelman.ca> References: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DCBBF72@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> <22889.1511226157@obiwan.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 [194.254.61.138]); Tue, 21 Nov 2017 13:29:32 +0100 (CET) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5A141C2C.003 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5A141C2C.003 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 : 5A141C2C.003 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [homenet] homenet-babel-profile: determining link type X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 12:29:39 -0000 >> Should we really only suggest that the router dynamically probe the >> quality of wireless links? Or would it make sense to suggest dynamic >> probing of all links, because assuming the entire path between 2 >> routers uses a single physical layer technology may not be a good >> assumption? > I agree that is should probe all interfaces! Then you need to define suitable algorithms for non-WiFi interfaces. I'm open to collaboration, of course, since dynamically computed metrics is something that's close to my heart. (Somebody promised to send me some G.hn hardware at some point, but they must have forgotten.) > Some wires might be better than others; assume use of random joiners between > cat3,cat5,cat6 and chicken wire in the home. Babeld's wireless link quality estimation triggers around 5% packet loss; on WiFi, it only works because we're careful to send frames that are not protected by ARQ -- after ARQ, the loss rate is way below that, even on dodgy links. You're not going to get loss rates that over chicken wire (unless you've got really bad quality chicken wire). > (a booth at N+I back in ~2000 or something had a very nice GbE over > barbed wire demo) Somewhat charged politically ;-) -- Juliusz