Behcet,
On Nov 14, 2012, at 4:35 AM, Behcet Sarikaya wrote: > Hi Jouni, > >>> Requirement: DMM solutions SHOULD support multicast services. > > So here it is a should. It seems so. >>> If a specific DMM solution does not support multicast services, an >>> explanation MUST be provided. > > Why is it a must here? So that one provides a proper justification why the solution chose to leverage the former SHOULD and left multicast support unattended. That makes sense to me. > My comment on this requirement is in mobility area, we have never had > these types of requirements. > > For example PMIPv6 was developed with no multicast support. I doubt it was intentional. RFC6224 did a good job clarifying the operation of a MAG as a MLD proxy later on. > MIPv6 and PMIPv6 were developed with no fast handover support. MIPSHOP > WG worked on handover extensions to these protocols. > > As you know, Costas has changed his view "thinking wider". I'll let him speak for himself. > If we look back to the beginning of this discussion, i.e. Multimob > meeting in Atlanta and Seil's presentation, we, at least myself, were > mislead. In that presentation at > http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/85/slides/slides-85-multimob-6.pptx > > We thought that he had a multicast requirement and a reasonable > suggestion was to take it to dmm. However, if you look at his slide 6, > he does have a requirement there but it is REQ1 from the DMM > requirements draft :-). > > If existing requirements are covering what we want, as it seems with > REQ 3/4/5, why not go with them? Perhaps we should have learned what happened with PMIPv6. The assumption was that multicast would work over it just fine, which was at the end not quite true. Thus a specific requirement reminding us about that should be ok. If that multicast specific note boils down to a clarification to an existing requirement, it is ok. I just don't think we are there yet to jump into that conclusion. So, coming back to the proposal from JC & Kostas. There was a concrete text proposal. If someone thinks the multicast requirement can be part of existing requirements; propose text. - Jouni > > Regards, > > Behcet _______________________________________________ dmm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
