Re: [multimob] Fw: WG Action: Mobility Multicast (multimob)

["Seil Jeon" <[e-mail]>]

Thank you for quick response.

As you know, it means that there are description paragraph.. 

message address from LMA to MAG, from MAG to MN, and .. etc.


Definitely, I got your point.

Best Regards,

Seil Jeon 

-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas C. Schmidt [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 10:11 PM
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [multimob] Fw: WG Action: Mobility Multicast (multimob)

Hi Seil,

Seil Jeon wrote:

> I have already read you draft.. -mcast-deployment-01.txt
>
Thanks & thanks for commenting. I suppose you speak about
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-schmidt-multimob-pmipv6-mcast-deployment-01

> There are message source and destination address from LMA to MN, and MN to LMA.
> 
I'm not sure what you mean. But of course, yes. There are source and destination addresses. But there is no tunnel between  LMA and MN. 
Actually, an MN in PMIP should not see a reason to initiate a tunnel with the LMA.

> But, how multicast packets can be transmitted?
> 

Well, as stated in the draft: The LMA will receive multicast data by whatever means (out of scope for this document). It will forward this data to the tunnel interfaces with MAGs, from which it previously received corresponding JOINs at. Here it is assumed that the LMA is somehow a multicast-aware router (Proxy or DR).

Mcast data will then arrive at the MAGs (on their upstream interface of the corresponding proxy instance). It will decapsulate and forward on those downstream interfaces that have appropriate mcast fowarding states.

> Your opinion is same as http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-krishnam-multimob-pmip6basicmcast-solution-00.txt ?

I suppose you speak about
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-krishnan-multimob-pmip6basicmcast-solution-00

There has been a longer discussion on the list. The difference with this approach is twofold: First, draft-krishnan-multimob-pmip6basicmcast-solution does define new protocol operations, so it is not a BCP-type. Second, there is some 'surprising' use of a tunnel: A unidirectional tunnel enforced to the MN.
> 
> I want to know how tunneled multicast packet are treated.
> 
The LMA-MAG tunneling I just tried to explain above. If encapsulated packets with a unicast outer header are transmitted via any of those entities, they should be treated as unicast - just standard packet forwarding.

Did I answer your questions?

Thanks,

Thomas

> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On 
> Behalf Of Thomas C. Schmidt
> Sent: Friday, September 11, 2009 2:08 AM
> To: [e-mail]
> Cc: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [multimob] Fw: WG Action: Mobility Multicast (multimob)
> 
> Hi Dirk & all,
> 
> [e-mail] wrote:
> 
>> As I understand from the charter we should now focus on improving the existing drafts for WG approval as version 00 in November, right?
>>
> 
> I guess we should: charter enforces a very tight schedule.
> 
>> So we have to decide which of the existing solution drafts to merge 
>> and adapt to achieve those documents ... My personal impression is 
>> that while for a 'document explaining the use of multicast in PMIPv6'
>> we have several existing proposals available,
> 
>  From my knowledge of numerous existing PMIPv6 Multicast drafts, there is only one that deploys multicast without protocol modifications:
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-schmidt-multimob-pmipv6-mcast-deploym
> ent-01
> 
> The document has already received a number of substantial reviews that are accounted for in the current version.
> 
> As we will prepare a major update prior to Hiroshima, we very much encourage further comments and reviews. We are urged for a fast convergence process.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Thomas
> 
>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>> Von: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] Im 
>> Auftrag von Stig Venaas
>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 9. September 2009 23:05
>> An: Behcet Sarikaya
>> Cc: [e-mail]
>> Betreff: Re: [multimob] Fw: WG Action: Mobility Multicast (multimob)
>>
>> Hi all
>>
>> Behcet Sarikaya wrote:
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>>   We look forward to working with Multimob folks.
>>> Profiting the occasion, we thank previous co-chairs Suresh Krishnan 
>>> Brian Haberman and Gorry Fairhurst
>>>
>>> for their contributions towards the formation of the WG.
>> Most of you probably have no idea who I am. I will now be chairing 
>> this group together with Behcet. While I have not been visible, I 
>> have been following the previous work and appreciate the efforts the 
>> people above, Behcet and the rest of you already have made.
>>
>> My background is mainly multicast. I have been working on multicast 
>> for years, and it is also what I mostly do as a day job. I now work 
>> for Cisco, while until a few months ago I've been more in the 
>> academic world.
>>
>> I look forward to working with you all, and our first meeting as a wg.
>>
>> Stig
>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Stig & Behcet
>> _______________________________________________
>> multimob mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multimob
>> _______________________________________________
>> multimob mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multimob
> 

-- 

Prof. Dr. Thomas C. Schmidt
° Hamburg University of Applied Sciences                   Berliner Tor 7 °
° Dept. Informatik, Internet Technologies Group    20099 Hamburg, Germany °
° http://www.haw-hamburg.de/inet                   Fon: [phone] °
° http://www.informatik.haw-hamburg.de/~schmidt    Fax: [phone] °