Internet ProtocolConsidered Harmful

Ken Calvert*University of Kentucky

*Speaking for myself only

Proposition

The Internet Protocol (v4) isat best useless,and at worst harmful,

in home networksconsisting of a NAT-ed, single broadcast

domain.

(Belief: this covers most cases.)

The “Mass Market” Case

Internet

NAT Gateway/Bridge/Router

1. IP is unnecessary

Inside clients don’t know (or need to know) anything about their own IP addresses

IP functionality is superfluous Single broadcast domain bridging suffices MAC addresses provide both▪ Global uniqueness▪ Technology-independence

Inside IP addresses are meaningless outside Name resolution (if any) can/should use

MAC addresses

2. IP Causes Headaches in the Home

Requires that the user act as network administrator Choose: static addressing or DHCP? Network prefix? Where is my DHCP server(s)?

Endpoints must allow configuration endpoints can be misconfigured E.g., someone changes host to a static IP address Now the user must also diagnose the problem!▪ With inadequate tools

▪ No way to “RESET” the whole network!

What’s the alternative?

Third option: “Ignore IP” Should be the default Force user to say “I know what I’m doing” to use

any other option (static assignment or DHCP) Let endpoints use arbitrary IP addresses

Local-scope addresses for uniqueness Transport demux still works

Identify endpoints with MAC addresses Inside applications Ethernet was designed for this!

Note: already happening in data centers

An Approach

Rely on MAC addresses Establish identities/function of devices Switch based on MAC addresses Infer (some) intent from port numbers

Partial prototype implementation “HomeRun” [Hasan, Edwards, Feamster,

Calvert] Built on NOX Box platform Todo: mechanism for establishing

identities/functions and getting to a “known good” state