Re-,
On 6/26/2012 Tuesday 2:50 AM, Behcet Sarikaya wrote:
On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 1:09 AM, Jacni Qin<[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Behcet, all,
On Friday, June 22, 2012 2:23:34 AM, Behcet Sarikaya wrote:
Folks,
We have published revised version of our draft on multicast extensions
to DS-Lite at
http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-sarikaya-softwire-dslitemulticast-01.txt
It's been discussed on the list and in the 81st meeting, and concluded quite
clearly by the WG why this is abandoned.
It tunnels the IGMP packets upwards, replicates the multicast traffic "per
tunnel", opposite to the property of multicast technology. And these are
problems we're trying to solve.
draft-ietf-softwire-dslite-multicast-02 has nothing to do with
DS-Lite and therefore it is not a DS-Lite multicast extensions
document as the charter requires.
OTOH, draft-sarikaya-softwire-dslitemulticast-01.txt integrates
multicast into DS-Lite tunnel.
It is not against multicast technology.
In this way, the efficiency is lost. If operators put the AFTR box
deeply in the network, far from the end users, as you process the
singling messages and replicate of traffic per tunnel, the network and
the box will crash because of the huge burden.
There is no necessity to initiate that kind of discussion once again.
I did not start this discussion. Please check the list.
Again please see above, or check the archive and the offlist messages
where we've explained it to you in detail.
Cheers,
Jacni
Regards.
Behcet
Cheers,
Jacni
We think that this draft should be part of
draft-ietf-softwire-dslite-multicast.
Regards,
Behcet
_______________________________________________
Softwires mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
_______________________________________________
Softwires mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
