RE: Interested in wireless ?

["Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <[e-mail]>]

Hello Alex

There's a difference between the MAC address used (0x333300-blah) that is multicast and the effective processing by the network. 
For all I know, the IEEE multicast protocols are pretty much never deployed, and only the first bit that says broadcast is of actual interest.
IOW the IETF has thrown the problem of handling multicast for a large number of groups over the fence to IEEE.
The end result is a broadcast to all nodes. True on both IEEE std 802.3 and 802.11.

If you are aware of networks that are operated differently I'm all ears.

Keep safe,

pascal

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alexandre Petrescu <[e-mail]>
> Sent: mardi 2 juin 2020 13:54
> To: Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: Interested in wireless ?
> 
> Hello Pascal,
> 
> Le 02/06/2020 à 09:55, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) a écrit :
> > Hello Alex
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: ipv6 <[e-mail]> On Behalf Of Alexandre Petrescu
> >> Sent: lundi 1 juin 2020 21:19
> >> To: [e-mail]
> >> Subject: Re: Interested in wireless ?
> >>
> >> draft says:
> >>>     To protect their bandwidth, some
> >>>     networks throttle ND-related broadcasts, which reduces the capability
> >>>     for the ND protocol to operate as expected.
> >>
> >> I suspect you mean ND-related multicasts, and not ND-related broadcasts.
> >
> > I meant ND-related MAC-layer broadcasts.
> 
> I think there are no MAC-layer broadcasts used by ND.
> 
> A MAC-layer broadcast is one that sends to ff:ff:ff:ff:ff.  That does not exist for
> ND.
> 
> Or maybe one means a PHY-layer broadcast?
> 
> Broadcast: casting broadly a message, like a fisherman casting a net, like in a
> TV broadcast.
> 
> Alex
> 
> L3 multicast turned in L2 broadcast.
> > But I see that the paragraph needs clarification, will do it for the next
> publication.
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Also, I guess that need to protect (maintain availability) bandwidth
> >> is different when more and more bandwidth is offered by a PHY/MAC in a
> terahertz range.
> >> Maybe these networks will stop throttling(?)
> >
> > I do not have a crystal ball for that. Look at Ethernet, now in the 100s of Gigs
> in the DC.
> > With the overlays and distributed cloud, the desire to eliminate broadcasts is
> more intense than ever.
> >
> > Keep safe,
> >
> > Pascal
> >
> >> Alex
> >>
> >> Le 01/06/2020 à 21:12, Alexandre Petrescu a écrit :
> >>> draft says:
> >>>>     The routers send RAs with a SLLAO at a regular period.  The
> >>>> period
> >>>>     can be indicated in the RA-Interval Option [RFC6275].  If
> >>>> available,
> >>>>     the message can be transported in a compressed form in a
> >>>> beacon,
> >>>>     e.g., in OCB Basic Safety Messages (BSM) that are nominally
> >>>> sent
> >>>>     every 100ms.
> >>>
> >>> I suggest to give CAM as an example as well, not just BSM.
> >>>
> >>> It might be that on some continent CAM is more important than BSM.
> >>>
> >>> It might be, that in an ideal world where all use Internet, there is
> >>> just one CAMBSM message, and maybe we get to that if we put it on IP.
> >>>
> >>> But until then, citing just BSM is not good enough.
> >>>
> >>> Alex
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Le 30/05/2020 à 13:46, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) a écrit :
> >>>> Dear all
> >>>>
> >>>> Since there’s so much energy on the list these days, could we
> >>>> consider the adoption of
> >>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-thubert-6man-ipv6-over-wireless-0
> >>>> 5
> >>>> ?
> >>>>
> >>>> I got only positive feedback, there’s no politics, there no label,
> >>>> it’s all about IPv6 models for wireless. This may appear useful in
> >>>> a world where the vast majority of devices are connected that way.
> >>>>
> >>>> Keep safe,
> >>>>
> >>>> Pascal
> >>>>
> >>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>> - IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [e-mail] Administrative
> >>>> Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> >>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>> -
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [e-mail] Administrative
> >>> Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> >> [e-mail]
> >> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------