re: [bmwg] Comments on draft-ietf-bmwg-mcastm-12.txt

Jerry wrote re: 6.1 Group Join Delay

>- The relationship between state and method is not clear.  I am 
>guessing that state 0 maps to ONLY method A and state 1 maps to ONLY 
>method B.  This section looks like two tests jammed under one heading.

I will add clarifying text to Method A & Method B that specifically
references the initial MFDB state.

>One suggestion would be to divide this into two different tests.  Put 
>state 0 and method A under '6.1.1 Initial Group Join Delay'.  Then put 
>state 1 and method B under '6.1.2 Primed Group Join Delay'.

I don't recommend that this section be broken into two tests.  Regardless of
the two test conditions, delay is still determined using the same goalposts,
much like obtaining Latency or Throughput metrics while modifiers are
present.  By stating the method used in the configuration section of the
report, one can easily compare if the delay metric is affected under the two
test conditions.  

Debby Stopp 
Principal Software Engineer
(818) 444-2365
IXIA
26601 W. Agoura Rd. 
Calabasas 
CA 91302 
Tel: 818 871 1800 (US) +1 818 871 1800 (international) 
debby@ixiacom.com
http://www.ixiacom.com 
_______________________________________________
bmwg mailing list
bmwg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg