On 7/13/2012 Friday 9:22 PM, Tom Taylor wrote:
On 13/07/2012 1:44 AM, Stig Venaas wrote:
On 12.07.2012 20:21, Jacni Qin wrote:
On 7/10/2012 Tuesday 4:46 AM, Behcet Sarikaya wrote:
Well, from the so many mails below it is clear that
No, it's clearly clarified from the mails, about the motive, and the
problems to be solved.
draft-ietf-softwire-dslite-multicast-02 is anything but multicast
extensions document for DS-Lite.
And it's clear that the "extensions" are definitely NOT to simply use
the unicast tunnel for multicast delivery
in DS-Lite deployment.
FWIW, I think the document is a good solution for multicast in a DS-Lite
environment. I just would like some modifications to the document to
reflect that it is a more generic solution.
Stig
..
I heartily agree with Stig. I think the WG has the choice either to
generalize this document or accept
draft-tsou-softwire-6rd-multicast-01 as a parallel solution for the
6rd environment. A single more general document makes more sense.
What you're talking is totally different from Stig's.
As we all know, the ONLY target scenario of this document is DS-Lite
environment, even we loose the text and make the door open for the
current mechanisms to be reused by future possible scenarios, there
won't be any overlap with the target scenario of
draft-tsou-softwire-6rd-multicast-01.
So I think parallel solutions are better.
Cheers,
Jacni
Tom
_______________________________________________
Softwires mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
