Hi Behcet |As you know, Costas has changed his view "thinking wider".
I didn't change my view :) Maybe it was not so clearly explained, apologies for that. I think that it does not harm to have a separate "REQ no. 7" addressing multicast along the lines previously mentioned in the mailing list. However, if drafting such a REQ delays our progress in the WG wrt the -reqs draft, the best practices/gap analysis work or, even worse, going after concrete DMM solutions in a speedy manner, it makes more sense to tweak some of the existing requirements text so we can accommodate the requirement for multicast support. After all, the current DMM chapter does not explicitly mention "multicast". |If existing requirements are covering what we want, as it seems with |REQ 3/4/5, why not go with them? I agree, but it's reasonable, since the point was brought up, to explicitly cover multicast (one way or another, see above) in the -reqs draft. Best Regards, Kostas _______________________________________________ dmm mailing list dmm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
