IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [multrans] Draft Multrans BoF request

"Lee, Yiu" <Yiu_Lee@Cable.Comcast.com> Mon, 13 June 2011 21:46 UTC

Return-Path: <yiu_lee@cable.comcast.com>
X-Original-To: multrans@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: multrans@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE9AF11E80AC for <multrans@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Jun 2011 14:46:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.734
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.734 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Pye7-peuSsCk for <multrans@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Jun 2011 14:46:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cable.comcast.com (copdcimo01.potomac.co.ndcwest.comcast.net [76.96.32.251]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF6E311E80A1 for <multrans@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Jun 2011 14:46:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([24.40.55.42]) by copdcimo01.cable.comcast.com with ESMTP with TLS id 5503630.40443800; Mon, 13 Jun 2011 15:49:10 -0600
Received: from PACDCEXMB02.cable.comcast.com ([fe80::9803:aba4:1ac8:474e]) by PACDCEXHUB01.cable.comcast.com ([fe80::d1e7:20b5:9b63:21a6%12]) with mapi id 14.01.0289.001; Mon, 13 Jun 2011 17:46:12 -0400
From: "Lee, Yiu" <Yiu_Lee@Cable.Comcast.com>
To: Tina Tsou <tena@huawei.com>, Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
Thread-Topic: [multrans] Draft Multrans BoF request
Thread-Index: AQHMKVEQI0ttNqtGZ0a/FRHSSyGv7JS6ujvwgABjLwCAALUiEYAAAW6A
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2011 21:46:11 +0000
Message-ID: <CA1BFD28.10383%yiu_lee@cable.comcast.com>
In-Reply-To: <516A794B-C2CB-4FD5-83E8-F37BB65BB655@huawei.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.0.101115
x-originating-ip: [82.242.9.241]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_CA1BFD2810383yiuleecablecomcastcom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "multrans@ietf.org" <multrans@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [multrans] Draft Multrans BoF request
X-BeenThere: multrans@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discuss the work of IPv4-IPv6 multicast." <multrans.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/multrans>, <mailto:multrans-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/multrans>
List-Post: <mailto:multrans@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:multrans-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multrans>, <mailto:multrans-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2011 21:46:23 -0000

Jari mentioned that some Chinese operators have started investigating multicast for their IP-TV delivery. I think ZTC and Huawei may have more insights.


From: Tina Tsou <tena@huawei.com<mailto:tena@huawei.com>>
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2011 15:42:02 -0600
To: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net<mailto:jari.arkko@piuha.net>>
Cc: "Yiu L. LEE" <yiu_lee@cable.comcast.com<mailto:yiu_lee@cable.comcast.com>>, Tom Taylor <tom111.taylor@bell.net<mailto:tom111.taylor@bell.net>>, "mohamed.boucadair@orange-ftgroup.com<mailto:mohamed.boucadair@orange-ftgroup.com>" <mohamed.boucadair@orange-ftgroup.com<mailto:mohamed.boucadair@orange-ftgroup.com>>, "multrans@ietf.org<mailto:multrans@ietf.org>" <multrans@ietf.org<mailto:multrans@ietf.org>>
Subject: Re: [multrans] Draft Multrans BoF request

Also, for my background: are there providers who are asking for multicast transition solutions? I.e., not just deploying multicast separately for the two IP versions?
Jari,
There are people from FT and Comcast as the author of the problem statements, indicating they are asking not just deploying multicast separately for the two IP versions. It does not have to mean their deployments are exactly the same as the document.
In addition, in my mind, the deployment of SSM and ASM on the dual stack network is also part of multicast transition. Some operators are asking it. Though the priority could be discussed, the scope could be discussed.

Best regards,
Tina TSOU
http://tinatsou.weebly.com/

On Jun 13, 2011, at 11:08 AM, Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net<mailto:jari.arkko@piuha.net>> wrote:

Tina, others,

I'm trying to construct a wiki entry for this BOF so that the IESG and IAB have all the information available to them to make decisions on what BOFs to approve on Thursday. What other drafts than the ps I should list? Is there a pointer to a mailing list post or some web site for the proposed charter? Also, for my background: are there providers who are asking for multicast transition solutions? I.e., not just deploying multicast separately for the two IP versions?

Here's what we have so far:


MULTRANS - Multicast Transition

Description: Proposed BOF to gather efforts around enabling IPv4-IPv6 coexistence and transition with multicast traffic. This proposal has relationships to existing chartered work in SOFTWIRE and BEHAVE working groups.
Length of session: 120 minutes
Responsible AD: Jari Arkko, Ralph Droms, and David Harrington
Mailing list:  <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multrans> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multrans
Drafts: [ jaclee-behave-v4v6-mcast-ps<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jaclee-behave-v4v6-mcast-ps-02>]
Agenda: [ agenda<http://www.arkko.com/ietf/ietf-81/multrans/agenda.txt>]
Charter: TBD
Status: Under consideration

Jari

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email