Re: [ssm] msnip status

Beau Williamson <bwilliam@cisco.com> Thu, 20 October 2005 01:27 UTC

Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1ESPDN-0007qW-2G; Wed, 19 Oct 2005 21:27:29 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1ESPDM-0007qR-Ag for ssm@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 19 Oct 2005 21:27:28 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA01588 for <ssm@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Oct 2005 21:27:18 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sj-iport-3-in.cisco.com ([171.71.176.72] helo=sj-iport-3.cisco.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ESPPC-0002ur-SE for ssm@ietf.org; Wed, 19 Oct 2005 21:39:43 -0400
Received: from sj-core-5.cisco.com ([171.71.177.238]) by sj-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 19 Oct 2005 18:27:19 -0700
X-IronPort-AV: i="3.97,232,1125903600"; d="scan'208"; a="354355672:sNHT25866312"
Received: from xbh-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-231.cisco.com [128.107.191.100]) by sj-core-5.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id j9K1Qk9W007562; Wed, 19 Oct 2005 18:27:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from xfe-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.174]) by xbh-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Wed, 19 Oct 2005 18:27:15 -0700
Received: from bwilliam-t30.cisco.com ([10.89.5.146]) by xfe-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Wed, 19 Oct 2005 18:27:13 -0700
Message-Id: <6.0.0.22.2.20051019202448.03370740@email.cisco.com>
X-Sender: bwilliam@email.cisco.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.0.0.22
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 20:26:21 -0500
To: Toerless Eckert <eckert@cisco.com>, Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net>
From: Beau Williamson <bwilliam@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [ssm] msnip status
In-Reply-To: <20051019231203.GG29643@cisco.com>
References: <20051019124841.GL9025@storhaugen.uninett.no> <ce8f3212bc8ba11a7739b4c9433e3a22@innovationslab.net> <20051019231203.GG29643@cisco.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Oct 2005 01:27:13.0652 (UTC) FILETIME=[66416B40:01C5D515]
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 6cca30437e2d04f45110f2ff8dc1b1d5
Cc: ssm mailing list <ssm@ietf.org>, Isidor Kouvelas <kouvelas@cisco.com>
X-BeenThere: ssm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Source-Specific Multicast <ssm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ssm>, <mailto:ssm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ssm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ssm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ssm>, <mailto:ssm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: ssm-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ssm-bounces@ietf.org

Well, I think the deafening silence on this topic over the last couple of 
years pretty much speaks for itself.

To a large degree, MSNIP is a solution in search of a problem.  I'd rather 
see us focus our efforts elsewhere myself.

Beau Williamson
At 10/19/2005 06:12 PM, Toerless Eckert wrote:
>Brian: What exactly where the points that stopped the last MSNIP draft
>from moving forward ? I unfortunately don't remember the details,
>and in general i'm of course annoyed that there's no good means in the
>IETF to keep that last work status summary alive in case it needs to
>get picked up again.
>
>I think MSNIP tried to solve a key functionality for the SSM architecture,
>and while it may be possible to ad-hoc hack something similar up once
>somebody requires it, i still think that it would be good to have an
>IETF recommendation for this functionality.
>
>If we were to release an RFC, we could make it informational. I don't
>think that MSNIP itself needs to be focussed on what Pekka is claiming
>"universal adoption". Because it only applies to sources, it will always
>tender only to comparably much fewer places than for example IGMP.
>
>Cheers
>         Toerless
>
>
>On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 12:40:30PM -0400, Brian Haberman wrote:
> > Hi Stig,
> >      The consensus is that msnip is not the solution people want.
> > Additionally, there has been no one volunteering to work on the
> > problem in general.
> >
> >      Combining MSNIP with MRD doesn't make a lot of sense
> > and any such plans were abandoned.
> >
> >      If you have people interested in the problem, have them bring
> > forth ideas.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Brian
> >
> > On Oct 19, 2005, at 8:48, Stig Venaas wrote:
> >
> > >Now that magma is being shut down, what is the future of
> > >draft-ietf-magma-msnip? I know several people that are
> > >interested in seeing this work continue. Are there any
> > >plans for that, or has it more or less been decided that
> > >this is not the way to go? I know there were discussions
> > >on combining it with MRD, but don't think that went
> > >anywhere.
> > >
> > >Stig
> > >
> > >
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >ssm mailing list
> > >ssm@ietf.org
> > >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ssm
>
>
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > ssm mailing list
> > ssm@ietf.org
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ssm
>
>
>--
>Thanks
>    Toerless Eckert
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>ssm mailing list
>ssm@ietf.org
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ssm

_______________________________________________
ssm mailing list
ssm@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ssm