Subject: [homenet] Naming requirements

From: Ted Lemon <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2017 18:03:13 +0200

Julian asked me to write this up, so I'm sending a note with what I think
the requirements are:

1. It should be possible for hosts on the homenet to resolve names
2. It should be possible that if the homenet is multi-homed, a host that is
capable of supporting provisioning domains (RFC7556) is able to treat a
particular ISP's prefix and resolvers as being in a different provisioning
domain than another ISP's prefix and resolvers.
3. For hosts that do not support multiple provisioning domains, it should
be the case that the homenet only presents a single provisioning domain to
them (we can treat the homenet provisioning domain and one of the ISP
provisioning domains as a single provisioning domain for the sake of this
statement).
4. It should be possible for hosts on any link on the homenet to discover
services on that or any other link on the homenet
5. Full support for existing uses of service discovery (e.g., Apple's Sleep
Proxy) should exist
6. It should be possible for an HNR that has greater capabilities (e.g. the
advanced homenet naming architecture) to be elected as the default resolver
for the homenet, so that all hosts on the homenet have access to the
improved features of that HNR
7. Not all HNRs should be required to support the advanced homenet naming
architecture.
8. Possibly it should be possible to have a low-cost HNR that cannot act as
an HNR in support of the simple homenet naming architecture without there
being a fully-capable HNR on the network (IOW, an HNR that supports
Discovery Relay but not Discovery Proxy).

I don't know that the entire working group agrees on this set of
requirements, but it's my best attempt to dump my internal state on the
topic.   It's quite possible that I've failed to report one of these
internalized requirements, of course.

---

From: Ted Lemon <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2017 18:21:12 +0200

I'm going to blame this on jet lag.   Sorry, Juliusz.   I meant Juliusz,
not Julian.

On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 6:03 PM, Ted Lemon <[email-masked]> wrote:

> 2. It should be possible that if the homenet is multi-homed, a host that
> is capable of supporting provisioning domains (RFC7556) is able to treat a
> 5. Full support for existing uses of service discovery (e.g., Apple's
> Sleep Proxy) should exist
> 6. It should be possible for an HNR that has greater capabilities (e.g.
> the advanced homenet naming architecture) to be elected as the default
> resolver for the homenet, so that all hosts on the homenet have access to
> the improved features of that HNR
> 8. Possibly it should be possible to have a low-cost HNR that cannot act
> as an HNR in support of the simple homenet naming architecture without
> there being a fully-capable HNR on the network (IOW, an HNR that supports

---

From: Juliusz Chroboczek <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2017 03:02:30 +0200

> I'm going to blame this on jet lag. Sorry, Juliusz. I meant Juliusz, not
> Julian.

That's okay.  Julius Caesar violated the Geneva Convention at the siege of
Alesia, while emperor Julian was a humanist, a scholar, and a philosopher.

-- Juliusz