Re: [MBONED] draft-zhou-mboned-multrans-path-optimization

Hi Ron,
How about we changing the title to "Multicast path optimization in IPv4 and IPv6 networks"?
In fact, this problem not only exists in the translator case, but also in the pure IPv6 case. 
As I replied to Stig's comments, this idea comes from RFC4601, which talks about IPv4 case. 
We hope to solve similar problems in both translator and pure IPv6 cases.

Best Regards,
Cathy ZHOU

-----Original Message-----
From: Ronald Bonica [mailto:rbonica@juniper.net] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2012 2:23 AM
To: Cathy Zhou(Qian); mboned@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [MBONED] draft-zhou-mboned-multrans-path-optimization

Cathy,

It seems wrong to use the words "transition" and "optimization" in the same sentence. By definition, any investment in a transition technology is a "throw away" investment. Once the transition is complete, the investment yields no return.

Do we really want to optimize a technology that:

- has not yet been fully specified
- has not yet seen any deployment
- should be decommissioned as soon as possible

                                           Ron

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cathy Zhou(Qian) [mailto:cathy.zhou@huawei.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2012 4:27 AM
> To: Ronald Bonica; mboned@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: [MBONED] draft-zhou-mboned-multrans-path-optimization
> 
> Hi Ron,
> It is possible to deploy and configure AFs to solve the problem. The
> IPv6 router and IPv4 router mentioned in this document could be AFs.
> But in the current AF document, the address translation and v4/v6
> interworking are mainly discussed. Routing issues are not considered
> yet.
> Our document proposed a possible way to solve such routing related
> problems.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Cathy ZHOU
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ronald Bonica [mailto:rbonica@juniper.net]
> Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 10:39 PM
> To: Cathy Zhou(Qian); mboned@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: [MBONED] draft-zhou-mboned-multrans-path-optimization
> 
> Hi Cathy,
> 
> At this point, can you tell me for certain that it is impossible to
> deploy and configure AFs in a manner that will prevent the problems
> that you are attempting to solve?
> 
>                                                Ron
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Cathy Zhou(Qian) [mailto:cathy.zhou@huawei.com]
> > Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 5:18 AM
> > To: Ronald Bonica; mboned@ietf.org
> > Subject: RE: [MBONED] draft-zhou-mboned-multrans-path-optimization
> >
> > Which AF behavior will pre-empt the entire issue?
> > AF function defines v4-v6 interworking, but this draft does not
> depend
> > on how AF functions. It can be applied in all transition cases
> > involving 4<->6 conversion.
> > So I think it can be processed in parallel with AF function
> definition.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Cathy ZHOU
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: mboned-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mboned-bounces@ietf.org] On
> > Behalf Of Ronald Bonica
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2012 11:28 PM
> > To: mboned@ietf.org
> > Subject: [MBONED] draft-zhou-mboned-multrans-path-optimization
> >
> > Folks,
> >
> > Is it appropriate to address the problems raised by draft-zhou-
> mboned-
> > multrans-path-optimization before the AF function has been defined? I
> > could imagine at least one AF behavior that would pre-empt the entire
> > issue.
> >
> > --------------------
> > Ron Bonica
> > //speaking as individual contributor
> > vcard:       www.bonica.org/ron/ronbonica.vcf
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > MBONED mailing list
> > MBONED@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mboned