Hi Pete,
things would be simple, if topology were as described.
Let's wait what dmm is birthing out ... and continue discussion then. In
any case, complex and incompatible "grand new schemes" do not appear to
make much sense.
Cheers,
Thomas
On 12.11.2012 22:53, Peter McCann wrote:
In the DMM case my assumption is that the anchor points are closer
to the access routers and therefore are very likely to be in the same
administrative domain. In these cases, joining the multicast group
directly from the access router gives you the same access to the same
multicast streams and so tunneling the multicast packets won't be
necessary.
-Pete
Thomas C. Schmidt wrote:
Dear Pete,
multicast mobility management is a route adaptation problem. As in the
unicast case, mobility can only be treated by routing dynamics in
trivial cases (re-connect of a tunnel, re-association with next hop).
Otherwise it is unwise to delegate mobility adaptation to routing
protocols (-> OSPF, BGP ...).
Accordingly, if DMM distributes mobility operations, handover
management should foresee easy interconnects to previous distribution
trees - both for receivers and for mobile multicast sources.
I guess, if DMM people are careful, this is not a world-class item and
can be treated along the lines of unicast solutions - an isolated
multicast protocol treatment (as has been previously proposed from
MULTIMOB folks) seems inappropriate. In core PMIP, multicast treatment
has turned out to work out simply (-> RFC6224).
Thus my argument: talk to the multicast guys before adopting a
solution ... and make the rest an easy game.
Cheers,
Thomas
On 12.11.2012 21:39, Peter McCann wrote:
jouni korhonen wrote:
Folks,
This mail is to kick off the discussion on multicast requirement(s)
for the draft-ietf-dmm-requirements-02 document. I hope we can nail
down the essential multicast requirement(s) as soon as possible.
To me, multicast in a DMM environment means joining multicast groups
directly from access routers. It means re-joining the multicast tree
from a new access router after handover. I would hope that we can use
existing MLD protocols between the MN and its first hop AR to
accomplish this.
-Pete
_______________________________________________
dmm mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
_______________________________________________
dmm mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
