Re: [MBONED] Input for 3171bis

[Michelle Cotton <michelle.cotton at icann.org>]

Title: Re: [MBONED] Input for 3171bis

Thanks for the response Marshall.

So based on your responses, and if there is no additional feedback are we ready to submit this to the IESG for approval?

Are there any other changes that need to be made to this version? (I guess this means WG speak up now!)

Thanks!

Michelle
IANA


On 3/3/09 9:45 AM, "Marshall Eubanks" <tme at multicasttech.com> wrote:

> On Mar 3, 2009, at 12:39 PM, Michelle Cotton wrote:
>
> > Marshall,
> >
> > I didn’t see any responses on the list.  Any suggestions on how to 
> > get these remaining issues resolved.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Michelle
> > IANA
> >
> >
> > On 2/24/09 10:49 AM, "Michelle Cotton" <michelle.cotton at icann.org> 
> > wrote:
> >
> > Marshall,
> >
> > I see that the Working Group Last Call message you sent out 
> > indicated the Last Call would end February 20th.
> > I sent the following message out on that day but have not seen any 
> > responses on the list.  Can you assist us in resolving the remaining 
> > issues?
> >
> > Thanks in advance.
> >
> > Michelle
> > IANA
> >
> > ------ Forwarded Message
> > From: Michelle Cotton <michelle.cotton at icann.org>
> > Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2009 11:09:30 -0800
> > To: <mboned at ietf.org>
> > Subject: [MBONED] Input for 3171bis
> >
> > Attention MBONED Working Group:
> >
> > During 2008 there were some comments on the mailing list from Pekka 
> > and
> > Prashant.  Some of the points they bring up would need decisions 
> > made by the
> > working group and not IANA.
> >
> > These include:
> >
> > Comments by Prashant Jhingran (2/20/2008):
> >
> > 1)  As per my understanding, the "225.0.0.0   - 231.255.255.255
> > 7 /8s RESERVED" addresses are the ones which are going to be
> > widely used for ASM multicast by various multicast content
> > providers (channels/data-sources).
> > Who (whether IANA or someone else) is going to
> > monitor/provide these addresses to the multicast content
> > providers because content providers must use unique
> > addresses for each channel globally.
> >
> > Shouldn't this be clarified?
>
> These addresses are reserved. If they are needed, a bis for 3171bis 
> can be written. I don't
> see a problem here.
>
> >
> >
> > 2) Section 8.1.  Assignment Guidelines
> >
> > "Because the SSM model essentially makes the entire
> > multicast address space local to the host, no IANA
> > assignment policy is required."
> >
> > Once again, SSM addresses should also be globally unique and
> > thus someone should monitor these as well. Shouldn't this be
> > clarified?
> >
> >
>
> I do not see why there is any need for globally unique SSM addresses. 
> The channel
> address (the S,G tuple) needs to be unique, but that can be done by 
> the holder of "S".
>
> Regards
> Marshall
>
>
> > Comments by Pekka Savola (03/09/2008)
> >
> > We have gone through the comments made by Pekka. Some of them will be
> > addressed in an updated version of this document.  Others will be 
> > addressed
> > in a future policy document.  This document it meant to cover more 
> > of the
> > procedures for IANA to follow regarding assignments.  We will begin 
> > working
> > on the policy document after this document has been published.  We 
> > would
> > like to re-start policy related discussions when we begin working on 
> > that
> > document.
> >
> >
> > Please see version 05 of this document that is being Last Called and 
> > submit
> > all comments so that we can review and address them.
> > Marshall can assist with answering questions as he is currently the 
> > IESG
> > designated multicast expert.
> >
> > Thank you for your time and efforts.
> >
> > Michelle Cotton
> > Leo Vegoda
> > IANA
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > MBONED mailing list
> > MBONED at ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mboned
> >
> >
> > ------ End of Forwarded Message