IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

"Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@boeing.com> Thu, 28 June 2012 22:26 UTC

Return-Path: <albert.e.manfredi@boeing.com>
X-Original-To: mboned@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mboned@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A22711E80EE for <mboned@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Jun 2012 15:26:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Vk6lWb+NvSKF for <mboned@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Jun 2012 15:26:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from blv-mbsout-01.boeing.com (blv-mbsout-01.boeing.com [130.76.32.231]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3C4811E80E1 for <mboned@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Jun 2012 15:26:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from blv-mbsout-01.boeing.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by blv-mbsout-01.boeing.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/DOWNSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTP id q5SMQ8oN017705 for <mboned@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Jun 2012 15:26:08 -0700
Received: from blv-av-01.boeing.com (blv-av-01.boeing.com [130.247.16.37]) by blv-mbsout-01.boeing.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/UPSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTP id q5SMQ8in017702 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 28 Jun 2012 15:26:08 -0700
Received: from blv-av-01.boeing.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by blv-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/DOWNSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id q5SMQ6rq025295; Thu, 28 Jun 2012 15:26:06 -0700
Received: from XCH-MWHT-05.mw.nos.boeing.com (xch-mwht-05.mw.nos.boeing.com [134.57.119.160]) by blv-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/UPSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id q5SMQ6UF025284 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=OK); Thu, 28 Jun 2012 15:26:06 -0700
Received: from XCH-MW-08V.mw.nos.boeing.com ([134.57.118.180]) by XCH-MWHT-05.mw.nos.boeing.com ([134.57.119.160]) with mapi; Thu, 28 Jun 2012 17:26:06 -0500
From: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@boeing.com>
To: Stig Venaas <stig@venaas.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 17:26:04 -0500
Thread-Topic: [MBONED] An alternative to draft-ietf-mboned-64-multicast-address-format?
Thread-Index: Ac1VfKvCX/xLwhMORFmgWlSCFUIbkQAADIuQ
Message-ID: <B0147C3DD45E42478038FC347CCB65FE02BC4A5ADC@XCH-MW-08V.mw.nos.boeing.com>
References: <4FECD32D.30403@venaas.com> <EE15DDE8-F921-4F9F-B0B4-704A8BD10045@huawei.com> <4FECD960.8070407@venaas.com>
In-Reply-To: <4FECD960.8070407@venaas.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-TM-AS-MML: No
Cc: "mboned@ietf.org" <mboned@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [MBONED] An alternative to draft-ietf-mboned-64-multicast-address-format?
X-BeenThere: mboned@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mail List for the Mboned Working Group <mboned.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mboned>, <mailto:mboned-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mboned>
List-Post: <mailto:mboned@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mboned-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mboned>, <mailto:mboned-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 22:26:09 -0000

Wait, is there any reason to require anything more than a predictable IPv6 multicast address prefix for this?

Bert

-----Original Message-----
From: mboned-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mboned-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Stig Venaas
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 6:23 PM
To: Tina TSOU
Cc: mboned@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [MBONED] An alternative to draft-ietf-mboned-64-multicast-address-format?

On 6/28/2012 3:11 PM, Tina TSOU wrote:
> The AD said draft-ietf-mboned-64-multicast-address-format has been moved to WG 6man.

I know. But I think whether this alternative approach can work is
something we probably need to consider here in mboned. We are the
ones that are looking at translation mechanisms and need some kind
of mechanism to show that an IPv4 address is embedded.

Stig

> Tina
>
> On Jun 28, 2012, at 2:58 PM, "Stig Venaas" <stig@venaas.com> wrote:
>
>> The draft draft-ietf-mboned-64-multicast-address-format specifies as you
>> know, a new flag to indicate that an IPv4 multicast address is embedded.
>> This is useful for translators (and maybe other devices) that can then
>> extract the IPv4 address and doing operations as needed on that address.
>>
>> I would like to present a possible alternative, and hear your thoughts.
>> What if instead, when the group address is specified in a PIM join, or
>> an MLD report, there was a flag as part of the PIM/MLD message that
>> indicated that an IPv4 address is embedded?
>>
>> A new draft describing this is available at
>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kumar-mboned-64mcast-embedded-address-00
>>
>> What do you think? Might this be an alternative? Are there other
>> cases (apart from receiving a PIM join or an MLD report), where we
>> need to know that an IPv4 address is embedded in the group address?
>>
>> Stig
>> _______________________________________________
>> MBONED mailing list
>> MBONED@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mboned


_______________________________________________
MBONED mailing list
MBONED@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mboned

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email