Re: [ippm] WG interest in Multicast performance monitoring drafts

Hi, guys, 
  I agree with Yaakov. All the existing group RFCs are based on active measurement. Passive measurement could be interesting but we need some foundation before calling it. 
  The performance of multicast is an important matter to study and it is within the group charter. 

Cheers,
Lei  

-----Original Message-----
From: ippm-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ippm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Yaakov Stein
Sent: 02 August 2010 07:30
To: Henk Uijterwaal; Tempia Bonda Alberto
Cc: matt@internet2.edu; IETF IPPM WG
Subject: Re: [ippm] WG interest in Multicast performance monitoring drafts

I see two distinct issues here :
  1) passive monitoring
  2) multicast performance

If IPPM is interested in entering into passive monitoring methods, then perhaps it should define these for unicast flows first.
(As I mentioned at the meeting, MEF has developed a lot of this for layer-2.)

Multicast performance is indeed an important topic to be studied.

Y(J)S

-----Original Message-----
From: ippm-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ippm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Henk Uijterwaal
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 14:53
To: Tempia Bonda Alberto
Cc: matt@internet2.edu; IETF IPPM WG
Subject: [ippm] WG interest in Multicast performance monitoring drafts

IPPM Group,

Last Monday, Alberto and others presented this set of drafts:

> > at the upcoming IPPM meeting in Maastricht we will present a draft 
> > about multicast performance monitoring 
> > (draft-bipi-mboned-ip-multicast-pm-requirement-01).
> > Requirement draft:
> > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bipi-mboned-ip-multicast-pm-require
> > ment-01
> > Solution drafts:
> > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-liu-mboned-multicast-realstream-mon
> > itor-02 
> > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-cociglio-mboned-multicast-pm-00

We would like to know if people consider this topic appropriate for the IPPM WG, and if so, if there is interest to work on this topic.

The drafts discuss passive measurements of actual traffic streams, using the metrics developed in IPPM.  In the current charter, this work is out of scope, so picking it up would require a charter change.  Obviously, we only want to do this if there is sufficient interest in the work.

Please respond to the list or the chairs in private by September 13.

Matt & Henk

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Henk Uijterwaal                           Email: henk.uijterwaal(at)ripe.net
RIPE Network Coordination Centre          http://www.xs4all.nl/~henku
P.O.Box 10096          Singel 258         Phone: +31.20.5354414
1001 EB Amsterdam      1016 AB Amsterdam  Fax: +31.20.5354445
The Netherlands        The Netherlands    Mobile: +31.6.55861746
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I confirm today what I denied yesterday.            Anonymous Politician.
_______________________________________________
ippm mailing list
ippm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm
_______________________________________________
ippm mailing list
ippm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm