Re: [MBONED] [multrans] Comments on Dual Stack case

Bonjour Mounir,
Would you send out your comments these two days?
Christian is working on the Problem Statement I-D and plans to post the I-D
at the end of this week.

We keep our promises with one another  no matter what!

Best Regards,
Tina TSOU
http://tinatsou.weebly.com/contact.html

-----Original Message-----
From: KELLIL Mounir [mailto:mounir.kellil@cea.fr] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 12:56 AM
To: Tina Tsou
Cc: MBONED WG; pim@ietf.org; multrans@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [multrans] Comments on Dual Stack case

Bonjour Tina,

Sure I will be happy to review the document

Regards

Mounir KELLIL
CEA LIST
e-mail : mounir.kellil@cea.fr
web : http://www-list.cea.fr

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Tina Tsou [mailto:tena@huawei.com]
> Envoyé : mercredi 4 mai 2011 02:22
> À : KELLIL Mounir
> Cc : 'MBONED WG'; pim@ietf.org; multrans@ietf.org
> Objet : RE: [multrans] Comments on Dual Stack case
> 
> Bonjour Mounir,
> If you consider a dual-stack network only, that's what we are looking
> for.
> 
> Would you review
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-jaclee-behave-v4v6-mcast-ps/,
> and
> send out your comments or proposed text to reflect the issues of a dual
> stack network, which is not covered by the current version?
> 
> Merci.
> 
> Yiu Lee is editing the XML file.
> 
> 
> We keep our promises with one another - no matter what!
> 
> Best Regards,
> Tina TSOU
> http://tinatsou.weebly.com/contact.html
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: KELLIL Mounir [mailto:mounir.kellil@cea.fr]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:12 AM
> To: Tina Tsou
> Cc: MBONED WG; pim@ietf.org; multrans@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: [multrans] Comments on Dual Stack case
> 
> Bonjour Tina,
> 
> We consider a dual-stack network only. The source could be IPv4 only or
> IPv6
> only, not necessarily both. Regarding SAMRG, they normally intend to
> push
> the work (not ours) further to IETF. But, honestly, I am not aware of
> their
> current status.
> 
> BTW, I will be happy to follow the discussions on multirans
> 
> Best regards
> 
> Mounir
> 
> Mounir KELLIL
> CEA LIST
> e-mail : mounir.kellil@cea.fr
> web : http://www-list.cea.fr
> 
> > -----Message d'origine-----
> > De : Tina Tsou [mailto:tena@huawei.com]
> > Envoyé : lundi 2 mai 2011 20:29
> > À : KELLIL Mounir
> > Cc : 'MBONED WG'; pim@ietf.org; multrans@ietf.org
> > Objet : RE: [multrans] Comments on Dual Stack case
> >
> > Bonjour Mounir,
> > Thank you. I read draft-kellil-sam-mtocp-01, it is useful to
> multrans.
> > Do
> > you consider dual stack network and/or dual stack source?
> > How is the status of IRTF's SAMRG group? Is it time to move some of
> the
> > research result into IETF now?
> >
> >
> > We keep our promises with one another - no matter what!
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Tina TSOU
> > http://tinatsou.weebly.com/contact.html
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: KELLIL Mounir [mailto:mounir.kellil@cea.fr]
> > Sent: Monday, May 02, 2011 8:10 AM
> > To: Tina Tsou
> > Cc: MBONED WG; pim@ietf.org; multrans@ietf.org
> > Subject: RE: [multrans] Comments on Dual Stack case
> >
> > Hi Tina,
> >
> > I think the problem you are addressing is interesting. It reminds me
> a
> > work
> > we've done in our team a few months ago (an old draft:
> > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kellil-sam-mtocp-01). We addressed
> the
> > multicasting problem in a heterogeneous IP network (heterogeneity in
> > terms
> > of multicast support and IP protocol version). We proposed an overlay
> > paradigm to be applied at the transport layer. Overlay nodes are in
> > charge
> > of forwarding traffic, but also translating IPv4 packets into IPv6
> > packets
> > and vice versa. Maybe this work (and probably others from IRTF's
> SAMRG
> > group) could be quoted as a "state-of-the-art". Just a suggestion...
> >
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Mounir KELLIL
> >
> > CEA LIST
> > web : http://www-list.cea.fr
> >
> > > -----Message d'origine-----
> > > De : multrans-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:multrans-bounces@ietf.org]
> De
> > la
> > > part de Tina Tsou
> > > Envoyé : samedi 30 avril 2011 00:58
> > > À : multrans@ietf.org
> > > Cc : 'MBONED WG'; pim@ietf.org
> > > Objet : [multrans] Comments on Dual Stack case
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > > Just bring some comments on the dual stack case for the new problem
> > > statement I-D based on
> > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-jaclee-behave-v4v6-mcast-
> ps/.
> > > And I
> > > also suggest the new problem statement I-D being
> > > draft-jaclee-multrans-v4v6-mcast-ps, since it is not ONLY behave
> any
> > > more.
> > >
> > > I cc pim@ietf.org and mboned@ietf.org looking for multicast
> expertise
> > > to
> > > help on input to this new problem statement.
> > >
> > > Comments on Dual Stack case are below, inspired by talk with Stig.
> > > 1. Even in the native dual stack case, you want to save bandwidth,
> > not
> > > put
> > > two copy of bandwidth under one source.
> > >
> > > 2. For P2MP case, the receivers are part of IPv4, part of IPv6,
> this
> > is
> > > problem.
> > >
> > > 3. For video conference, you have 30 people, 15 are v4, 15 are v6,
> > and
> > > any
> > > of them can send their videos (everyone has a webcam and
> microphone).
> > >
> > >
> > > We keep our promises with one another - no matter what!
> > >
> > > Best Regards,
> > > Tina TSOU
> > > http://tinatsou.weebly.com/contact.html
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > multrans mailing list
> > > multrans@ietf.org
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multrans
> 