Subject: [homenet] long term goals

From: Mikael Abrahamsson <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2013 17:37:07 +0200 (CEST)

Hi,

I was advised to start a new thread. I realise a lot of what I wrote below 
doesn't directly impact homenet, but I would like to hear if at least we 
can take into account that the below kind of scenario (and more) is within 
scope and we should take needed protocols into account when we decide how 
to design homenet related protocols.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2013 08:53:50 +0200 (CEST)
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <[email-masked]>
To: Michael Richardson <[email-masked]>
Cc: "[email-masked] Group" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [homenet] IETF 87 - call for agenda items

On Thu, 4 Jul 2013, Michael Richardson wrote:

> I would like the WG to spend some face time dealing with (making a list of), 
> things that need to be configured, which are not routes.

I would like to see a scheme where anything can be configured, including stuff 
which can be vendor-specific/proprietary so vendors can deploy new 
functionality quickly without going through a standardisation process, and then 
at a later date when it becomes a standard, they can abolish the 
vendor-specific identifiers they've been using. I'm thinking along the way SNMP 
works here... So yes, there should be a discussion about what homenet needs to 
be configured, but overall I would homenet to create a solution that other 
configuration information can ride along with.

High level goal I have in mind I would like to see "just working" in 5-10 
years.

I buy a new device. I unpack it and start it up. It sees a bunch of Wifi 
networks, I select one that is mine. On another device I run a "control my 
home" app, where I can see in chronological order what devices have requested 
access. I grant access to the device I just started up, it connects, sees 
configuration information from the network, and asks what role it should 
configure itself as. I select "Mikael Abrahamsson portable device", and through 
the same app mentioned before, I get a request, and I grant it. Now this device 
aquires a certain amount of privileges and configuration that I have configured 
all my portable devices to have, including mail accounts etc. All 
authorization/encryption/communication is done encrypted with a TPM style 
component internal to the device. Now this device automatically has configured 
itself to have my printers etc.

Now I bring this device to my friends house. He has already allowed access to 
"Mikael Abrahamsson devices" with some kind of guest privileges. My new device 
has already received information about what "friends" I have and since my 
friends network is broadcasting a key that belongs to my friend, my device 
automatically tries to connect, before that it verifies that the public key is 
correct (authenticating the network), my friends network autenticates my 
device, and my new device is allowed to connect without any unique action taken 
by my friend or me.

Same thing when I buy a new network device to connect to my network, I connect 
it, authorize it, what role it should have, and then everything is configured 
automatically.

The above scenario requires a staggering amount of configuration information, 
discovery and interaction. Not all of it new, but it needs to be tied together 
a lot and whatever configuration/discovery architecture we come up with should 
not be in the way of future developments in this area.

Am I totally "up in the sky" with the above vision of where things should be 
headed, or do we have a shared long-term vision within the WG?

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: [email-masked]
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet