Re: [MBONED] draft-tsou-mboned-multrans-addr-acquisition-01

hi,

On 5/17/2012 Thursday 9:07 AM, Tom Taylor wrote:
> I believe the subject draft should be adopted as a work item. In
> response to Jacni Qin, I note that the absence of such a document led
> to extensive discussion of the topic in the interim meeting, despite
> its treatment in the problem statement draft. This, I think, is a
> clear indication that something more had to be said.
>
Except for the extension mentioned in the second approach of 3.3, I
still can't see anything new than what have been discussed in the
Section 4 of Problem Statement,
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mboned-v4v6-mcast-ps-00#page-18


>
> The question of whether receiver modification is in scope has come up
> in prior discussion. 
Thanks for the information.


Cheers,
Jacni


> I think there should be a clear statement of the following in the
> introduction to the draft:
>
> (1) The most straightforward solution to the acquisition problem is to
> make receivers dual-stack. That is, the receiver can extract IP
> addresses from the EPG regardless of their version and join and leave
> streams using either IGMP/IPv4 or MLD/IPv6 depending on the supplied
> addresses.
>
> (2) Any solution that involves more costly changes to the receiver
> than making it dual-stack as just defined is therefore probably
> uneconomic.
>
> This is why the degree of receiver modification required is a
> consideration for the different solution approaches.
>
>
> One final remark: the current version of the draft doesn't necessarily
> cover all the possibilities, and one would hope the WG might add input
> to make it more inclusive. But it is probably a good start.
>
> Tom Taylor
> _______________________________________________
> MBONED mailing list
> MBONED@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mboned
>
>