The draft has been updated. Please see: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ghanwani-nvo3-mcast-framework-00
Further review/comments would be appreciated. Thanks, Anoop On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 9:28 AM, Anoop Ghanwani <[email protected]> wrote: > This is long overdue followup for multicast from the interim meeting. > > We plan to issue an updated draft shortly in which we will change the > title and name of the draft so that it reflects that it will cover a > discussion of both infrastructure (ARP/ND, mDNS, DHCP, etc.) and > application-level multicast per comments during the call. > > There was a comment by David Black about optimizing the number of > multicast groups required in the underlay which I believe is already > covered by the following > text in the draft: > > >>> > There are additional optimizations which are possible, but they come > with their own restrictions. For example, a set of tenants may be > restricted to some subset of NVEs and they could all share the same > outer IP multicast group address. This however introduces a problem > of sub-optimal delivery (even if a particular tenant within the > group of tenants doesn't have a presence on one of the NVEs which > another one does, the former's multicast packets would still be > delivered to that NVE). > >>> > > If folks have any other comments/concerns, please let us know. > > Thanks, > Anoop >
_______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
