Re: MBONED Digest, Vol 134, Issue 10

Thanks, James, Tim

Agreed. That additional text in the abstract didn't add good value *sigh*

Can i ask whether you are using PIM-SM or Bidir-PIM for these type of apps ?
Always particularily curious about how well PIM-SM with bursty sources
does work well (or not) in different scenarios. E.g: Do you think that
RFC 8364 would work equally well for your app environment ?

Cheers
    Toerless

On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 10:19:14PM -0500, James A. (Jim) Stevens wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Mar 2018 21:21:34 +0000
> ???
> , Tim Chown <[email protected]>  wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> >
> > We've just posted a new -01 version of the draft on deprecating
> > interdomain ASM. Toerless is now also an author.
> >
> > We'll be working on a further new version in the coming weeks, so all
> > comments and suggestions for improvement are very welcome.
> >
> > The WG session agreed WG adoption, but I've posted the -01 as an
> > individual draft as the adoption hasn't - I think - been confirmed on the
> > list.
> >
> > Best wishes,
> > Tim
> >
> > > On 29 Mar 2018, at 22:17, [email protected] wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
> > directories.
> > >
> > >
> > >        Title           : Deprecating ASM for Interdomain Multicast
> > >        Authors         : Mikael Abrahamsson
> > >                          Tim Chown
> > >                          Lenny Giuliano
> > >                          Toerless Eckert
> > >       Filename        : draft-acg-mboned-deprecate-interdomain-asm-01.txt
> > >       Pages           : 15
> > >       Date            : 2018-03-29
> > >
> > > Abstract:
> > >   This document recommends deprecation of the use of Any-Source
> > >   Multicast (ASM) for interdomain multicast.  It recommends the use of
> > >   Source-Specific Multicast (SSM) for interdomain multicast
> > >   applications, and that hosts and routers that are expected to handle
> > >   such applications fully support SSM.  The recommendations in this
> > >   document do not preclude the continued use of ASM within a single
> > >   organisation or domain, and are especially easy to adopt when already
> > >   using the preferred ASM protocol options there (PIM-SM).
> >
> >
> ???I think that this is an appropriate document.  One picky comment with
> respect to the following paragraph from the introduction:
> "   This document does not make any statement on the use of ASM within a
> 
>    single domain or organisation, and therefore does not preclude its
>    use.  Indeed, there may be a number of application contexts for which
>    ASM is currently still considered well-suited within a single domain.
> 
> "???
> ???As per the earlier emails, there are some applications contexts for which
> ASM is still the best suited approach.??? For example, in an earlier email, I
> mentioned a multicast scenario with many dynamic bidirectional sources and
> receivers, where we use ASM rather than SSM model to reduce management
> overhead and simplify source discovery by not having to track which nodes
> have joined which groups in order to do an SSM join to all the members of
> the group.
> 
> Thus, I recommend rewording the last sentence in that paragraph to
> something like
> "    Indeed, there are application contexts for which
> 
>    ASM is still considered well-suited within a single domain."
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Jim Stevens

> _______________________________________________
> MBONED mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mboned


-- 
---
[email protected]

_______________________________________________
MBONED mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mboned