Are you suggesting that IEEE and IETF send liaison letters to each other when they begin crafting new protocols? This could possibly be useful assuming anyone acted on it. The more likely scenario is for each SDO to send an liaison saying ³Hey we just spent x years designing our new protocol y, please take a look and see if your protocols both past and present will function efficiently over it.²
In my experience there seems to be very little overlap between engineers working in the IEEE and those working in the IETF. My company for example has exactly zero overlap. IPv6 Multicast over IEEE 802.11 seems to be a good example of how more interaction would be immensely useful early on in the protocol development process. I¹m not sure there is a fix here, but it would definitely be useful for both SDOs to keep in mind each others protocols for interoperability purposes instead of just pointing to the other to fix their protocols. Customers Jason On 8/7/15, 2:21 AM, "Mikael Abrahamsson" <[email protected]> wrote: >On Thu, 6 Aug 2015, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) wrote: > >> It is simply unfair from the IETF to use Wi-Fi as if it was Ethernet >>and >> then complain to IEEE that in fact it is not. > >This is an interesting viewpoint. IETF isn't "using wifi as if it was >Ethernet". The customers who buy Wifi products buy it and run IP over it, >expecting it should work (because that's what the advertising says). IP >has been designed for wired ethernet (and Wifi carries ethernet frames). >As far as I can tell, 802.11 never told the IETF that it wouldn't support >multicast (really). > >I'd say IETF isn't saying "IP works great over Wifi" (it doesn't really >make any claims for any L1 or L2). However, I see producers of Wifi >equipment saying that their products are great for using to connect to >the >Internet, which is saying "Wifi is great for IP". > >> IPv6 over Ethernet makes heavy use of multicast over Ethernet, which >>for >> the lack of a highly scalable Multicast service always ends up >> broadcasted over the whole fabric. >> >> When Wi-Fi is confused with Ethernet and the whole multi link becomes a >> single layer 2 fabric, we create a crisis that will not be solved by >> imputing the responsibility on the other SDO. > >Which is exactly why I said that both SDOs need to do something. However, >since IP was "first" I think that 802.11 should have come to IETF a long >time ago and said that it couldn't do multicast. Basically, what I >interpret you're saying is that Wifi in its current form isn't suited to >carry IP the way IP has been designed, for a long time. That would be >news >for a lot of people. > >> My suggestion is to finally recognize that Wi-Fi is not Ethernet, in >> particular from the perspective of multicast, and provide the >> appropriate L3 mechanisms for IPv6 over Wi-Fi, for which the backbone >> router discussed above is one candidate solution. > >It's not only IPv6, but it's also IPv4 (since it uses broadcast, but less >of it). > >But what I hear here is that your opinion is that 802.11 doesn't need to >change, but the IETF needs to change for IP to work over Wifi. I'd really >appreciate some kind of official agreement from each SDOs who should do >what. If the long-term technical solution is that the IETF should change >L3 to basically avoid broadcast and multicast, then that's fine, as long >as this is agreed upon by both parties. > >However, I do think that 802.11 needs to point out to its members that if >they don't implement assured multicast replication, IP doesn't work >properly. Then they can decide what should be done in the short term, >because changing IP will take quite a while. > >-- >Mikael Abrahamsson email: [email protected] > >_______________________________________________ >homenet mailing list >[email protected] >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout. _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
