Re: A concern about draft-acg-mboned-multicast-models recommendations
"Manfredi, Albert E" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.mboned |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
-----Original Message----- From: MBONED [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Tim Chown > A side effect of such a document would be to imply where ASM is at least > currently more suited intra-domain. It would be interesting to determine > what those cases actually are. From my POV, as briefly as possible, those are cases where multiple group members may become the source, and we want to avoid the hassle of having to specifically list each one, or exclude ones. We may not even know what possible sources might crop up. Examples where ASM is exactly what we want, and anything more than that is just added burden for no benefit. I get that inter-domain, with PIM-SM, that simplicity cannot exist. So inter-domain, SSM is actually simpler. It removes that rendezvous point complication, and then having to find a better route around it, for the multicasts. Bert _______________________________________________ MBONED mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mboned