Hi Sérgio & Seil Thanks for the proposed text.
> REQ8: Flexible multicast distribution > "DMM solutions SHOULD be compatible with flexible multicast distribution scenarios. This flexibility enables different IP multicast flows with respect to a mobile host to be managed (e.g., subscribed, received and/or transmitted) using multiple endpoints". [Luowen] Not quite understand what is meaning of " flexible multicast distribution scenarios"? And what is "multiple endpoints"？ I have read through the draft http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-sfigueiredo-multimob-use-case-dmm-03 roughly (sorry, not in detailed), it indeed describes some scenarios of multicast with dmm concept. But it gives me an impression that the scenarios are based on some kind of assumed unicast solution and architecture. Also, the text proposed here give me feeling that it falls into solution scope. BR Luowen Sérgio Figueiredo <[email protected]> 发件人: [email protected] 2012/11/16 22:59 收件人 [email protected] 抄送 主题 Re: [DMM] Multicast requirements Dear all, As requested we have been working on a proposal for updating current DMM Requirements draft, reflecting the work developed in "draft-sfigueiredo-multimob-use-case-dmm-03.txt". We were careful to follow the expressed concerns, mainly by not impacting the current (mostly accepted) draft structure and content. As such, we propose the following 2 changes: # Proposal 1 - small update to PS1 # PS1: Non-optimal routes Routing via a centralized anchor often results in a longer route. The problem is especially manifested when accessing a local server or servers of a Content Delivery Network (CDN), or when using IP multicasting. # Proposal 2 - Add a new requirement# REQ8: Flexible multicast distribution "DMM solutions SHOULD be compatible with flexible multicast distribution scenarios. This flexibility enables different IP multicast flows with respect to a mobile host to be managed (e.g., subscribed, received and/or transmitted) using multiple endpoints". Motivation: The motivation for this requirement is to enable flexibility in multicast distribution. The multicast solution may therefore avoid having multicast-capable access routers being restricted to manage all IP multicast traffic relative to a host via a single endpoint (e.g. regular or tunnel interface), which would lead to the problems described in PS1 and PS6. PS6: Duplicate multicast traffic IP multicast distribution over architectures using IP mobility solutions may lead to convergence of duplicated multicast subscriptions towards the tunnel’s downstream entity (e.g. MAG in PMIPv6). Concretely, when multicast subscription for individual mobile nodes is coupled with mobility tunnels, duplicate multicast subscription(s) is prone to be received through different upstream paths. This problem is potentially more severe in a distributed mobility environment [draft-sfigueiredo-multimob-use-case-dmm-03]. Best regards, Sérgio & Seil On 11/12/2012 10:49 PM, Seil Jeon wrote: Hi Pete, That might be one of them we can take on DMM. Imagine, depending on deployment of existing IP multicasting standard entities, we can think of various use cases as presented in http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-sfigueiredo-multimob-use-case-dmm-03. Direct routing cannot be applied in every scenario. After I came back from the trip, we (me and Sergio) have been working on this with priority. After carefully reviewing the requirement from the use cases, we'll announce it soon. Regards, Seil -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Peter McCann Sent: Monday, November 12, 2012 9:53 PM To: Thomas C. Schmidt Cc: Stig Venaas; Behcet Sarikaya; [email protected] Subject: Re: [DMM] Multicast requirements 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 _______________________________________________ dmm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm _______________________________________________ dmm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
_______________________________________________ dmm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
