Re: [MBONED] An alternative to draft-ietf-mboned-64-multicast-address-format?

["Manfredi, Albert E" <[e-mail]>]

> -----Original Message-----


> For multicast things are kind of reversed. From say PIM perspective,
> you
> can start out with someone joining an IPv6 group where the last 32 bits
> form an IPv4 group address. When this IPv6 join reaches say a device on
> the edge of the IPv4 network, it can based on configuration (or
> hard-coded if a standardized prefix), or a flag in the group address,
> or a join attribute (these are the solutions I think we have on the
> table), know that it should extract those 32 bits, and join the IPv4
> source. When it receives IPv4 data packets, it can based on its PIM
> state know what IPv6 address to translate them to.
> 
> There are other use-cases, this is maybe the easiest one.

This seems similar yo what I had described, except that the 96-bit prefix is configurable (presumably there will be an OOB mechanism to indicate what the prefix should be), AND it also seems to depend on PIM.

What about cases in which PIM isn't used? For example, where proxy IGMP or proxy MLD is used, to make multicasts traversing a network available to an egress router? Or are we saying that it's okay to have incompatible solutions depending on each use case?

Bert