Re: on the ieprep charter

> What the charter should, perhaps, address, is the status of  
> multicast in this. We all agree we need unicast solutions. RSVP  
> assumes that multicast is also a requirement, while NSIS presumes  
> that it can be summarily set aside. In civilian networks where  
> multicast is not widely deployed as a service, the point may be  
> moot. I am told that in your organization and others in coalition  
> with it, there are places where multicast is the predominant  
> traffic type, however. So we have to decide whether we need to  
> address that.

I'll chime up and say we *definitely* need to address multicast.  its  
fundamental in the context of efficiently supporting push-to-talk  
applications as one pushes IP further into the infrastructure of Land  
Mobile Radio.  and the subject becomes more of a headache since the  
establishment of talk groups are not based on explicitly signaled CAC

-ken