Re: AW: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-v6ops-unman-scenarios-00.txt

[Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>]

So are we addressing unmanaged networks or home networks?  Just need to
choose and name the work accordingly, given that not all home networks will
be unmanaged.

Sections 1 and 2 need to be tightened up either way.  If the home network
receives a /48 from the ISP (not unreasonable - if we assume a /64 then 
we're ignoring the RIR /48 site recommendations) then *something* has to 
be managed to deliver the /64 subnet(s) internally?  Or are we saying all
home networks will be "unmanaged" and receive /64's?

Tim

On Sat, Mar 08, 2003 at 12:04:05AM +0200, Pekka Savola wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Mar 2003, Bonness, Olaf wrote:
> > from my point of view it's fairly obvious to have different subnets
> > within my soho environment for instance one for every room I have or
> > besides that when I want to use parts of my home (network) for
> > professional reasons and want to separate this from my normal / private
> > life.
> 
> This in my book is clearly not _un_managed network.
> 
> In my book, if you have to set different perimeters with different 
> properties, hook up different segments to different router ports, etc. 
> etc., it is IMO clearly not the majority *unmanaged* solution.
> 
> YMMV.
> 
> > -----Ursprungliche Nachricht-----
> > Von: Ronald van der Pol [mailto:Ronald.vanderPol@rvdp.org]
> > Gesendet: Freitag, 7. Marz 2003 13:10
> > An: Bound, Jim
> > Cc: Christian Huitema; Pekka Savola; Ronald van der Pol; Margaret
> > Wasserman; v6ops@ops.ietf.org
> > Betreff: Re: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-v6ops-unman-scenarios-00.txt
> > 
> > 
> > On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 23:47:18 -0500, Bound, Jim wrote:
> > 
> > > Folks,
> > > 
> > > I don't agree with single link subnet.  This is not cool and implies I
> > > use bridges in my house.  In fact a colleague is now looking into UPnP
> > > to verify it is not stating this as we received rumor this was potential
> > > there too. People will run routers in their homes and SOHO's not only
> > > bridges with single subnet.
> > > That case will happen and we are not covering it.
> > 
> > You seem to be quite confident about that. Could you explain why you
> > think multiple subnets will arrive in SOHOs? I'm not saying I don't
> > agree with you. I just would like to know the scenarios where multiple
> > subnets are needed. And when they are needed. I think we have already
> > spent too much time on the scenario/analysis drafts. We should not
> > delay any longer when it is not absolutely necessary.
> > 
> > Another question is whether v6ops should pick this up. Maybe zerouter
> > (if that is going to be a WG) is a better place and we need to make
> > sure they cover IPv6, unmanaged networks and SOHOs too.
> > 
> > 	rvdp
> > 
> 
> -- 
> Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
> Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
> Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings
>