On Nov 13, 2012, at 4:49 PM, Konstantinos Pentikousis wrote: > Hi Juan Carlos, all, > > |Requirement: DMM solutions SHOULD support multicast services. In case > |the solution does not address multicast, a justification MUST be provided > |for the omission of multicast from the solution. > > I like this proposal. It appears to me to capture the essence of the request > to cover multicast in DMM. I would make it even shorter however: > > Requirement: DMM solutions SHOULD support multicast services. If a specific > DMM solution does not support multicast services, an explanation MUST be > provided.
Sounds ok to me. > |Motivation: The purpose of this requirement is to encourage people to > |consider the impacts of running multicast services in a DMM environment > |from the beginning of the development, thereby avoiding the need to > |make protocol extensions in the future to support this kind of > functionality. > > I second the motivation part, although I would also rephrase it a bit: > > Motivation: From an operational perspective, if a network domain provides > multicast services already, the deployment of a DMM solution should not > impede the delivery of such services. From a protocol perspective, a DMM > solution should aim to address unicast as well as multicast in a coherent > manner, thus avoiding the recurrence of "multicast add-ons", as is the case > with today's mobility management solutions. Ack. - Jouni > > Best Regards, > > Kostas > > > _______________________________________________ > dmm mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm _______________________________________________ dmm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
