W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-web-and-tv@w3.org > September 2011

Re: [HOME_NETWORK_TF] Terminology section of the requirements document

From: Clarke Stevens <C.Stevens@CableLabs.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2011 14:42:37 -0600
To: "WRIGHT, STEVEN A" <sw3588@att.com>, Giuseppe Pascale <giuseppep@opera.com>
CC: "public-web-and-tv@w3.org" <public-web-and-tv@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CA8E8398.10D75%c.stevens@cablelabs.com>
I like your proposed enhanced definition. As for geographical limitations,
I agree that the definition should be more broad. I think the use case of
remote device (e.g. cell phone or tablet) connected to your home network
should be able to access content and control devices. There are some
limitations on existing systems related to the domain of device discovery,
but there are also standard ways to extend beyond the geographical
limitations of the local network.

We would have to decide if we want this included in the scope of our
current work. At a minimum, we should not explicitly restrict it.

Thanks,
-Clarke

On 9/7/11 6:59 AM, "WRIGHT, STEVEN A" <sw3588@att.com> wrote:

>I would *hope* that this group's work is independent of address format
>etc., but I still think it would be helpful to indicate that the
>simplistic single legacy IPv4 subnet may not be a valid assumption,
>precisely because there are folks that don't know anything else might
>exist.  I would prefer to leverage an existing definition from another
>SDO if possible but the text below should help set the direction viz:
>
>
>home network 
>For the purposes of this document, the term "home network" refers to the
>networking infrastructure that facilitates Internet Protocol
>communications between devices within the home. This may range from a
>single legacy IPv4 subnet to multiple IPv4 subnets and dual stack or IPv6
>environments and will typically (but not always) be connected to the
>Internet. 
>
>
>Another point I am concerned about is the assumption that the home
>network is geographically restricted to a specific residential area.  Why
>is that assumption important? Are devices in my vacation home on my home
>network? Does this imply some content licensing restriction?
>
>
>
>__
>
> 
>Steven Wright, MBA, PhD.
>Lead Member of Technical Staff
>
>AT&T Services Inc.
>Architecture & Planning
>1057 Lenox Park Blvd NE, STE 4D28
>Atlanta, GA 30319
>P: 404.499.7030
>
>sw3588@att.com
>
>att.com
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Giuseppe Pascale [mailto:giuseppep@opera.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 8:24 AM
>To: WRIGHT, STEVEN A
>Cc: public-web-and-tv@w3.org; Clarke Stevens; Matt Hammond
>Subject: Re: [HOME_NETWORK_TF] Terminology section of the requirements
>document
>
>On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 14:30:49 +0200, WRIGHT, STEVEN A <sw3588@att.com>
>wrote:
>
>> I agree Home Network should be defined.
>> I'm not sure the assumption of a single subnet is valid in a home
>> network.
>the definition says "typically" so basically do not exclude multiple
>subnets
>
>> It also seems likely that both IPv4 and IPv6 addresses may need to be
>> supported going forward.
>>
>right, but probably not relevant for our document.
>Are you fine with the current definition  [1] in the requirement document
> 
>or would you suggest a rephrasing?
>
>/g
>
>[1]  
>http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/HNTF/Home_Network_TF_Requirements#Termin
>ology
>
>
>> Regards,
>> Steven Wright, MBA, PhD,
>> Sent from my ATT iPhone.
>> Rethink Possible.
>>
>> On Aug 30, 2011, at 2:01 AM, "Giuseppe Pascale" <giuseppep@opera.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 00:51:47 +0200, Matt Hammond
>>> <matt.hammond@rd.bbc.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Sounds good.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Agree with both. Merged into the requirement document.
>>> 
>>>http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/HNTF/Home_Network_TF_Requirements#Term
>>>inology
>>>
>>> /g
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Matt
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 23:40:34 +0100, Clarke Stevens
>>>> <C.Stevens@cablelabs.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I think it would be worthwhile to define it since the idea of a home
>>>>> network is a concept that has not been relevant in HTML to this
>>>>> point. I
>>>>> also think your definition is pretty good. We could also add
>>>>>something
>>>>> along the lines of, "The home network can also be considered the
>>>>>local
>>>>> area network (LAN) within the home."
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> -Clarke
>>>>>
>>>>> On 8/29/11 4:29 PM, "Matt Hammond" <matt.hammond@rd.bbc.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I've just noticed that the terminology section includes "companion
>>>>>> device"
>>>>>> ... which can be dropped since it no longer features in the
>>>>>> requirements
>>>>>> document.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Would it also be worth adding a definition for "home network"? I
>>>>>> appreciate this may be deceptively difficult to define in a way
>>>>>>that  
>>>>>> we
>>>>>> can all agree on; and perhaps that may be reason enough to exclude
>>>>>> it and
>>>>>>
>>>>>> therefore deliberately keep it ambiguous. Here is an attempt though:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "For the purposes of this document, the term "home network" refers
>>>>>> to the
>>>>>>
>>>>>> networking infrastructure that facilitates Internet Protocol
>>>>>> communications between devices within the home. This will typically
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> (but
>>>>>> not always) consist of a single IP subnet and will typically (but
>>>>>>not
>>>>>> always) be connected to the Internet."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Matt
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> | Matt Hammond
>>>>>> | Research Engineer, BBC R&D, Centre House, London
>>>>>> | http://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Giuseppe Pascale
>>> TV & Connected Devices
>>> Opera Software
>>>
>
>
>-- 
>Giuseppe Pascale
>TV & Connected Devices
>Opera Software
Received on Thursday, 8 September 2011 20:43:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 8 September 2011 20:43:45 GMT