[dnssd] multicast over wireless links

RJ Atkinson <rja.lists@gmail.com> Thu, 24 July 2014 14:53 UTC

Return-Path: <rja.lists@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: dnssd@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnssd@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4C451A03AF for <dnssd@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Jul 2014 07:53:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uk1DwytQwrGB for <dnssd@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Jul 2014 07:53:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x22e.google.com (mail-wi0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::22e]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 84DC81A03EA for <dnssd@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 Jul 2014 07:53:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wi0-f174.google.com with SMTP id d1so9851620wiv.7 for <dnssd@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 Jul 2014 07:53:22 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:subject:date:message-id :to:mime-version; bh=jHarN15f3eC9n38W405qd/JwfEqm5PdxlKI1Mlwmmsw=; b=SWkTIXsztnAelqdLD2kH6z8hz2p6dB8vK4WSXiBzSi9F/Y0Ujee4zv0cYp4EYFyzZJ NmRX9MHYNcZ/gxaFnfAj2MKhR1kSCVceGqeZsIRQ+DsgIB42bSrH1whS9PVmqSedd3pF jZlyuU3ei+Fc84ftiFv7e5OSwOVRfH91p/euWKpMfdt9N9tNl/W7guo68dxcpu8jSM6V hFMKwpMMhJHzfDaqBHcO+PGXDWc+HN6q0YbpFkJ28jQ2txNmVdEnqg/k1zmbf4EJ/UMJ emZPt3P9d5ltDVQeMaI3DlLh60eL6blp5faP9SBFn0Y7CcMcq8H7teWx0XW6mHIqB+nb jjQA==
X-Received: by 10.181.9.104 with SMTP id dr8mr13860222wid.26.1406213602207; Thu, 24 Jul 2014 07:53:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dhcp-b535.meeting.ietf.org (dhcp-b535.meeting.ietf.org. [31.133.181.53]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id de5sm23604451wib.18.2014.07.24.07.53.21 for <dnssd@ietf.org> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 24 Jul 2014 07:53:21 -0700 (PDT)
From: RJ Atkinson <rja.lists@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 10:53:19 -0400
Message-Id: <331F9173-DB56-4D9A-B09F-956FF6D8DA2B@gmail.com>
To: dnssd@ietf.org
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1283)
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1283)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnssd/YHyhmmf7DjWbHrU8x5j3KAT1aTc
Subject: [dnssd] multicast over wireless links
X-BeenThere: dnssd@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of extensions to Bonjour \(mDNS and DNS-SD\) for routed networks." <dnssd.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnssd>, <mailto:dnssd-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnssd/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnssd@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnssd-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnssd>, <mailto:dnssd-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 14:53:29 -0000

All,

While IEEE 802.11 has known specific issues with IP multicasting,
most radio links (including SATCOM) actually are natively
broadcast links, hence perform multicasting efficiently.

As an example, for my clients with IP/VSAT deployments or 
other IP/RF deployments (for RF != 802.11), multicast is 
the MOST EFFICIENT way to communicate and unicast is the 
LEAST EFFICIENT way to communicate.

As I've said in other IETF working groups, it would be a 
mistake to optimise an upper-layer protocol for a specific 
link-technology.  Instead, folks ought to engage with 
IEEE 802.11 to help them find ways to more effectively
support IP multicast traffic.

So I object to any proposal to "optimise" DNS-SD for 802.11,
because the issues with 802.11 are unique to the design of
its MAC/LLC layer protocols.

Yours,

Ran Atkinson