IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Softwires] draft-ietf-softwire-mesh-multicast-05.txt

Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@gmail.com> Wed, 17 July 2013 16:47 UTC

Return-Path: <sarikaya2012@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: softwires@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: softwires@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2F6021F9B8C for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 09:47:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.527
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.527 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.072, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
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 E0TDl-T2KR85 for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 09:47:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-la0-x236.google.com (mail-la0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::236]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B72E21F9ADD for <softwires@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 09:47:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-la0-f54.google.com with SMTP id ec20so1655660lab.41 for <softwires@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 09:47:51 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=4jANjqVjNrppKhWiBXfCs9g1iF/iWgIWKoTFLSDf3Nw=; b=F5JOMTzHmc+Cspw0DjlWqQzq5La9pJf73XSZjR9/bq5U1Nq7EoAWYDQIIe5Q1Klb8q lbvD9tBGLmM2tTrIzcRnIIbpvJtL4S8IMZc4bcqsquDOhdyQOvy3IjoYyB0+ibCg0F7h GYomwrkBCCic7f8vrglieSFK4eMC/lc55YU8+e1bLli93mDW/Q//i9roISVdLJtuXP1N YBdF70Il343MFvaVc4TlYQfiG72aDr1jaLeQLFlwBdGy2B7Fc+vhkjTBkM20hlfiwaUV Nhpv1IxOo68vGyaTnLJUHrrM9EEfk1iPPdCoEeETSECG+NnVASe3jirdZGvZY8twdSx3 48fA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.152.120.228 with SMTP id lf4mr3343395lab.65.1374079671444; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 09:47:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.114.176.37 with HTTP; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 09:47:51 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAL6OX+2CR5x+2QHn3FnrcG9qSZ4JQ0BFEaFEe8=SbN1ebBG=RQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAL6OX+3KDNvdryZZMHyGQ34dggKKEJW37MzeohPpJ6MwyjCbBw@mail.gmail.com> <CAC8QAceH3qOEn3wscouBA+AQcBLDRLMh6Cf48+TXBrPM993oZg@mail.gmail.com> <CAL6OX+2CR5x+2QHn3FnrcG9qSZ4JQ0BFEaFEe8=SbN1ebBG=RQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 11:47:51 -0500
Message-ID: <CAC8QAceDKmGYFR_YhV_OMqbbL3Q+vEVtCjY0+xDThU93dD0kow@mail.gmail.com>
From: Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@gmail.com>
To: Shu Yang <yangshu1988@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e01176915b5a9cd04e1b7daaa"
Cc: Softwires-wg <softwires@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Softwires] draft-ietf-softwire-mesh-multicast-05.txt
X-BeenThere: softwires@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: sarikaya@ieee.org
List-Id: softwires wg discussion list <softwires.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/softwires>, <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/softwires>
List-Post: <mailto:softwires@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires>, <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 16:47:53 -0000

Hi Shu,

I was referring to the mesh mode as opposed to hub and spoke mode (in
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-softwire-map-07).

I think that mesh mode and the softwire mesh (in RFC 5565) are two
different things. I must admit that I don't know the mesh architecture you
are talking about and don't have time to study it these days.

Regarding your draft, you define AFBR. I checked other Softwire transition
protocols, I could not find such an entity.
It is puzzling to me.

Regards,

Behcet


On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 9:46 AM, Shu Yang <yangshu1988@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi, Dear Behcet,
>
> > But my question is a very fundamental  one. I think that mesh
> architecture is
> > a very specific architecture. It seems that it will work only for
> unicast.
>
> In Section 11 of RFC5565,  it's recommended that softwire multicast be
> supported
> within the mesh framework.
>
> Best Regards,
> Shu Yang
>
> On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 3:07 AM, Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Shu,
> >
> > Please see inline.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Behcet
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 8:03 AM, Shu Yang <yangshu1988@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Dear Behcet,
> >>
> >> > If Softwire mesh means packets from the host to
> >> > one CE are directly routed to the destination CE, I
> >> > am puzzled how multicast can be supported in such a network?
> >>
> >> In Softwire mesh multicast, packets from source host are first
> >> routed to AFBR (address family border router), using multicast.
> >> Then packets travel through the core towards another AFBR
> >> (as the core runs MPBGP), with either unicast or multicast.
> >> At last, packets are routed to the destination, with multicast
> >> again.
> >>
> >
> > My question is not about how you propose to support multicast.
> >
> > But my question is a very fundamental  one. I think that mesh
> architecture is a very specific architecture. It seems that it will work
> only for unicast.
> >
> > As to your approach, of course you can do things like that but that
> would also work for non mesh architecture, right?
> >
> >
> >> Your further review and comments are more than welcome.
> >>
> >> Best Regards,
> >> Shu Yang
> >
> >
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email