Re: call for adoption of draft-mcbride-mboned-wifi-mcast-problem-statement
"Manfredi, Albert E" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.mboned |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
> 2017/12/05 4:44, Leonard Giuliano <[email protected]> wrote: > > > We would like to initiate a call for adoption of the Multicast Wifi Problem Statement draft in MBONED: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mcbride-mboned-wifi-mcast-problem-statement > > Please respond by Dec 18 if you do/do not support adoption of this draft. > > If you are listed as a document author, please respond to this email whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. If you are not listed as an author and are aware of any relevant IPR, please respond as well. I also support. Have a two minor quibbles. In Section 2, first paragraph: "Wifi loses many more packets then wired due to collisions and signal loss." I might say, "While the problem also exists in wired multicast, WiFi packet loss is exacerbated by collisions and signal loss." Otherwise, some might infer that WiFi somehow changes the multicast protocol itself? The WiFi multicast problems are caused only by the physical and MAC protocol layers. (Or at least, change "then" to "than," in the original text.) Then in Section 3: "Using 802.11n helps provide a more reliable and higher level of signal-to-noise ratio in a wifi environment over which multicast (broadcast) packets can be sent. This can provide higher throughput and reliability but the broadcast limitations remain." Is there something about 802.11ac that is not as good as 802.11n? Is it that 802.11n can also operate at 2.4 GHz? Not sure how to read that comment. Thanks. Bert _______________________________________________ MBONED mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mboned