RE: [magma] multicast senders behind an IGMP Proxy

> >  Concrete examples of generating
> > multicast within a home network include:
> >
> >  * sending audio to all of your IP-enabled speakers distributed
> >    throughout your house,
> >  * IP-enabled intercom system,
> >  * HD video to multiple telvision sets (kitchen and living room).
> >
> 
> I have a difficult time imagining a home network that would have to
> be subnetted.
> 
> And although I can imagine 2 HDTVs watching the same channel 
> sometimes, I don't believe it will happen often enough that 
> there would be any BW saving inside one's home.

So you're saying nobody would use multicast within their own 
network?  Here is what we plan on adding to the next revision of
the NAT Multicast document:

<begin>
   As many NATs are located adjacent to bandwidth-constrained access
   links, it is important that multicast senders communicating with
   multicast receivers behind the NAT not have their flows consume
   bandwidth on the access link.  This is accomplished by applications
   using administratively scoped IP addresses.

   REQ-6:   A NAT MUST NOT forward administratively scoped multicast
            traffic (239/8) [RFC2365] from its 'inside' interface(s) to
            its 'outside' interface, unless the NAT has been configured
            to do so.
<end>

Please let me know if you object to that text.

-d