I think we should separate discussion of the 'intermittent connection' problem from the broader configuration problem. I am much more concerned with deployment than solving problems that only affect 5% of users.
If your Internet connection is intermittent, you are going to need a local hub to direct operations when the external network drops. Providing that hub for LEO customers is an Elon Musk (and in the future possibly Jeff Bezos) problem, not a Comcast, Verizon or other broadband provider problem. Getting Starlink or other LEO Internet provider to deploy some additional in-the-home service to keep things running well is a much, much easier problem than getting several thousand cable and fiber ISPs to deploy. Wireless providers already deal with this problem. But even if they don't the problem of keeping the home running when power is lost is something people already spend money to solve. I am sure that the folk who buy home generators will be more than willing to buy a $10 RaPi in a case for $50. We can also push the problem onto the IoT vendors. I am sure that a company selling IoT doorbells for $50, no subscription will be happy to upsell them with a second $50 box. Another option is NAS providers. I am sure Western Digital or Seagate would be more than happy to upgrade one of their 'backup drives' to a home hub that records video from all the security cameras and keeps the home IoT running during a power failure. These are all important problems but we can achieve a 90%/10% solution by ignoring them which is why I have deleted the requirement for the home hub in my earlier proposal today. At this point, the home hub is a very nice to have optional extra in my scheme. So, I would have to show that if Alice starts with the MSP in the cloud model, she can transition to an in-home hub. But I think I already have that. On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 12:58 PM Michael Sweet <msw...@msweet.org> wrote: > Watson, > > > On Dec 19, 2024, at 11:54 AM, Watson Ladd <watsonbl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > ... > > Why do you need .local vs. .sdfi24241.subscribers.isp.example.com and > > setting that as a search domain? > > The device is accessible by both names for the given address, so it should > advertise both names in the certificate. > > > Also note that the local router can > > make DHCP option advertisements to configure things. > > For sure. > > > .. > > I don't understand why a one time requirement of net connectivity at > > registration/renewal makes it worthless. Let's solve the 90% we can. > > Because there are environments where you don't have Internet connectivity > *at all* (intentionally or unintentionally). Because requiring a local > device to talk to a remote service exposes PII. > > I have worked in environments where you cannot access outside networks. I > have also had the displeasure of setting up network gear (a router as it > happens) that had a one-time requirement for Internet connectivity at a > semi-remote location with spotty satellite Internet access, to the point > that I returned said equipment and let the manufacturer know why. > > > The problem with local trusted authority is that we don't really have > > a way to get it on the local devices, especially limited ones, that > > people can use. > > Matter seems to do it. And really you are not talking about *all* IoT > devices, just those that are capable of TLS and TCP/IP - less than that and > you are bridging to other kinds of connectivity that provide their own > layer of security/access. > > ________________________ > Michael Sweet > >
_______________________________________________ Acme mailing list -- acme@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to acme-le...@ietf.org
