Subject: [homenet] Naming: a strawman counter-proposal

From: Juliusz Chroboczek <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 11:27:30 +0200

Not proposing this seriously, just attempting to explore the design space.
Some of the ideas are due to Toke.

Zones and authoritative nameservers are announced over HNCP together with
their set of addresses, which SHOULD include a LUA and MUST include at
least one IPv6 address.  There are two bits associated with each
authoritative nameserver:

  - default: set to 1 if the zone is suitable for name registration without
    explicit user configuration;
  - public: set to 1 if the zone is visible from the public internet.

When a router joins the homenet, it MAY announce itself as the new
authoritative nameserver for a zone.  It SHOULD do so if there is no
default public or private zone.

If there are two default private zones or two default public zones, we
call an election, Highlander-style.  If there are two authoritative
nameservers for the same zone, we call an election.

There are no secondaries.  If there are secondaries, their configuration
is outside the scope of this mail.

Stateful DHCP servers SHOULD register their clients with the authoritative
nameserver for the default private zone using your favourite unicast
mechanism.  Clients MAY register themselves with any zone currently
announced (they learn the server addresses through HNCP snooping or a from
new ND option, I don't care).

mDNS proxying into the default private zone is allowed.  Or recommended,
I'm not sure, only implementation experience will tell.

Why exactly am I speaking nonsense?

-- Juliusz

---

From: Ted Lemon <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 15:27:09 +0200

This proposal doesn't satisfy the problem statement.

(which nobody wrote. :)

I don't want to tube on writing a formal requirements doc before we finish
doing a naming architecture, but I think now that I've taken a stab at
this, we should think about our reactions to and see if we can scope the
problem we are trying to solve in a bit more detail than just "naming and
service discovery on homenets."

On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 11:27 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek <
[email-masked]> wrote:

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

---

From: Juliusz Chroboczek <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 09:24:28 +0200

> (which nobody wrote. :)

Perhaps we could start by writing up the usage scenarios we have in mind?
I'll start:

1. I want to point a web browser at the configuration interface of the
   router in my attic;
2. I want to point a web browser at the boom-box in my living room
     2a. the boom-box speaks IP and is Homenet-aware;
     2b. the boom-box speaks IP but is not Homenet-aware;
3. I want you to join in a game that I'm playing, so I need a memorable
   public URL for the Nethack server
     3a. the Nethack server is in my Homenet;
     3b. the Nethack server is outside my Homenet;
4. I'm running a BitTorrent seeder, and I want the RIAA to be able to
   perform a reverse mapping on my IP address so they can use a memorable
   name in their correspondence.

Naming of routers and hosts is likely to use different mechanisms, which
is why I separate (1) and (2).  I've never understood the purpose of
reverse mapping except for debugging, so (4) is the best I could come up
with.

-- Juliusz

---

From: Tim Chown <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2016 21:30:24 +0000

On 20 Jul 2016, at 14:27, Ted Lemon <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:

(which nobody wrote. :)

I don't want to tube on writing a formal requirements doc before we finish doing a naming architecture, but I think now that I've taken a stab at this, we should think about our reactions to and see if we can scope the problem we are trying to solve in a bit more detail than just "naming and service discovery on home nets."

I think we came to this conclusion in dnssd too, from you seeding the discussion in the context of service discovery in a “flat namespace homenet" there.

Tim

On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 11:27 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:
Not proposing this seriously, just attempting to explore the design space.
Some of the ideas are due to Toke.

-- Juliusz

_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet

_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet