Re: [v6ops] Multicast problem in IPv6 address management

Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> Wed, 12 August 2020 17:24 UTC

Return-Path: <nick@foobar.org>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5C663A073D; Wed, 12 Aug 2020 10:24:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.849
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.849 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.949, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id y3-49mok1O3C; Wed, 12 Aug 2020 10:24:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.netability.ie (mail.netability.ie [IPv6:2a03:8900:0:100::5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B482E3A0744; Wed, 12 Aug 2020 10:24:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Envelope-To: v6ops@ietf.org
Received: from crumpet.local (admin.ibn.ie [46.182.8.8]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.netability.ie (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id 07CHNdtn093764 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 12 Aug 2020 18:23:40 +0100 (IST) (envelope-from nick@foobar.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: cheesecake.ibn.ie: Host admin.ibn.ie [46.182.8.8] claimed to be crumpet.local
To: Vasilenko Eduard <vasilenko.eduard@huawei.com>
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>, IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>
References: <54d926767ff14e6d98a034f525e5521f@huawei.com> <8B672A3B-0917-46FE-B00C-13DCD7059F7A@strayalpha.com> <16fca7281aa143aeadc8ca985fa44294@huawei.com>
From: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>
Message-ID: <63e37634-ceb3-4373-84ad-c77ac7c44823@foobar.org>
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 18:23:38 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 PostboxApp/7.0.25
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <16fca7281aa143aeadc8ca985fa44294@huawei.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-GB
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/ZnwFUWAtpIUFwO0O8GI1m64cTvs>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Multicast problem in IPv6 address management
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 17:24:06 -0000

Vasilenko Eduard wrote on 12/08/2020 18:15:
> But multicast packet (without beam forming) could not penetrate the wall 
> in principle (common case for 5Ghz). 100% loss guarantied.

wifi is an IEEE protocol, so maybe they'd be better people to talk to 
about this?

Nick