Joe, I'm mainly concerned in this discussion on what error rate is needed for acceptable performance of the protocols that support IPv6 - e.g. DAD, RA. Streaming multimedia is a separate discussion since different solutions might apply to it.
> While I agree with your conclusion, what's the alternative if there is > no L2 multicast? 802.11 does have L2 multicast. It just doesn't provide for L2 ack and retry for L2 multicast (at least in its basic form, there is a recent optional extension for that) so the packet loss can be higher than that for unicast. > I think you're arguing for more specific guidance on acceptable packet > loss rates for various uses of multicast, but that might be out of scope > for RFC3819 (even as a -bis). I gave it a quick scan, and as I checked > (and recall) RFC3819 doesn't make specific recommendations on BER for > unicast either. It says that the BER needed depends on the use, and that > can affect the efficiency of L3. The same is true for multicast, but > that doc is not the place for a specific recommendation. I don't think advice on that would be out of place as "Advice for Internet Subnetwork Designers" if it is what is needed to make IPv6 work well. People here have expressed consternation that 802.11 doesn't have good enough performance for that, but how can you expect subnets to provide that performance when the need hasn't been included in the advice. Even if the number doesn't get put into an RFC3819-bis, it would be useful to have a number so that solutions can be examined. _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
