From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-we0-x22c.google.com (mail-we0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c03::22c]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 457C721F2DB for ; Sat, 7 Jun 2014 11:21:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-we0-f172.google.com with SMTP id k48so4247820wev.3 for ; Sat, 07 Jun 2014 11:21:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=v5NY3krzkXpzIurtVBaNkZ4DFrtSYL8fEvbYGVPgD/M=; b=NmSlzM/xsQuKExsnRpwNVo32wpN+x21y74fsz7Ijgc6xERMwajfFKlVrE+YD5Cx09c TIxIHk7PPMsb22j5bOVXNYacn/4JzS/xDT+8IqwuZJFQcVFVojkqXUP9Z55DuaPtsSLw tc8wJNXlmHrVRxxbgCatKCtsQ23IOKq+k6JaUVIFOwCu/LE1D9xi96zg7ZmkMSggQ64M 7BPeWoVUz2ateHZFwQ0HGN9KvWdIrk86ReBtw3rpLoXieg2DUvLij3PKIqcsZgDmNvSQ aF68PHHW07lHaDqK7TIwjNbpN4/E/xrFggsg+DA6DDx8FDaeh9C1/F+PJKXHFGmIqX+2 xfJA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.194.22.100 with SMTP id c4mr5125850wjf.89.1402165278000; Sat, 07 Jun 2014 11:21:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.207.82 with HTTP; Sat, 7 Jun 2014 11:21:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20140607180243.D681A119C54@ccr.org> References: <20140607180243.D681A119C54@ccr.org> Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2014 11:21:17 -0700 Message-ID: From: Dave Taht To: "Mike O'Dell" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] Cerowrt-devel Digest, Vol 31, Issue 4 X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Jun 2014 18:21:20 -0000 The homenet argument, is that there is already typically dozens of routing like devices in the home today, and double/triple nat often resulting from misconfiguration. Townsley makes the arguement coherently in the video I mentioned earlier. If you can take 15 minutes out of your day to watch that, perhaps the point will be made. Notably bridging ethernet to zigbee and sensor networks (and wifi, to a large extent) is an horrifically bad idea. (IMHO). There are people strongly in favor of using Rbridges in that situation... Short term, finding ways to avoid double-triple-nat would be an improvement on how things work. In my own case I worry more about small business than home networks. Once you fall off the cliff of bridging, the route towards routing is hard. And I'm totally in love with the idea of getting multiple uplinks to different providers to "just work". On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 11:02 AM, Mike O'Dell wrote: > > excuse my naivete, but why on earth is homenet worried about > "interior routers"? there shouldn't *be* any interior routers > in a home network. ethernet switches, sure, but not routers. > > -mo > _______________________________________________ > Cerowrt-devel mailing list > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht NSFW: https://w2.eff.org/Censorship/Internet_censorship_bills/russell_0296_= indecent.article