[Softwires] Regarding draft-sarikaya-softwire-6rdmulticast-02.txt
"WRIGHT, STEVEN A" <sw3588@att.com> Fri, 02 March 2012 20:06 UTC
Return-Path: <sw3588@att.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 4C1C521E8034 for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Mar 2012 12:06:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 fhqPcNupf2jP for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Mar 2012 12:06:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail120.messagelabs.com (mail120.messagelabs.com [216.82.250.83]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C8AB21E8027 for <softwires@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Mar 2012 12:06:19 -0800 (PST)
X-Env-Sender: sw3588@att.com
X-Msg-Ref: server-12.tower-120.messagelabs.com!1330718777!51738645!1
X-Originating-IP: [144.160.20.146]
X-StarScan-Version: 6.5.5; banners=-,-,-
X-VirusChecked: Checked
Received: (qmail 1006 invoked from network); 2 Mar 2012 20:06:18 -0000
Received: from sbcsmtp7.sbc.com (HELO mlpd194.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com) (144.160.20.146) by server-12.tower-120.messagelabs.com with DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 2 Mar 2012 20:06:18 -0000
Received: from enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mlpd194.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q22K4iFH005666 for <softwires@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Mar 2012 15:04:44 -0500
Received: from sflint04.pst.cso.att.com (sflint04.pst.cso.att.com [144.154.234.231]) by mlpd194.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q22K4fSm005570 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <softwires@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Mar 2012 15:04:41 -0500
Received: from GAALPA1MSGHUB9D.ITServices.sbc.com (gaalpa1msghub9d.itservices.sbc.com [130.8.36.90]) by sflint04.pst.cso.att.com (RSA Interceptor) for <softwires@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Mar 2012 15:06:08 -0500
Received: from GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com ([169.254.4.62]) by GAALPA1MSGHUB9D.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.8.36.90]) with mapi id 14.01.0355.002; Fri, 2 Mar 2012 15:06:08 -0500
From: "WRIGHT, STEVEN A" <sw3588@att.com>
To: "softwires@ietf.org" <softwires@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Regarding draft-sarikaya-softwire-6rdmulticast-02.txt
Thread-Index: Acz4r+W+TzNuIbKBR8CZPNX2txygng==
Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2012 20:06:06 +0000
Message-ID: <C3E0E0A52DD7EB4F9ED09728E6FD764706908B@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [135.70.5.94]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-RSA-Inspected: yes
X-RSA-Classifications: public
X-RSA-Action: allow
Subject: [Softwires] Regarding draft-sarikaya-softwire-6rdmulticast-02.txt
X-BeenThere: softwires@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
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: Fri, 02 Mar 2012 20:06:20 -0000
There is no address shortage in the IPv4 multicast address space, though it is nice to see completeness of support for multicast in 6rd.If I understand this correctly, this draft tunnels the IPv6 multicast stream as an AMT tunnel riding over the 6rd tunnel between the RG and 6rd BR. This has the disadvantage that it cannot leverage packet replication the in access network, which is potentially inefficient. It might be helpful if the document pointed out that limitation. As a transition strategy that inefficiency may be ok, or if it is some new low bandwidth service. Current access equipment like DSLAMs do not support layer 3 Multicast completely, but it typically does support snooping on the IGMP messages and packet replication at layer 2. I believe some of the BBF specs provide a more complete description of this behavior. Steven Wright, MBA, PhD. Lead Member of Technical Staff AT&T Services Inc. Architecture & Planning 1057 Lenox Park Blvd NE, STE 4D28 Atlanta, GA 30319 P: 404.499.7030 sw3588@att.com<mailto:sw3588@att.com>
- [Softwires] Regarding draft-sarikaya-softwire-6rd… WRIGHT, STEVEN A