Dear all,
FYI, a new version of this draft has been edited to take into account comments
received in mboned ML.
The main changes in -04 are as follows:
o Indicate the draft update RFC3306 as suggested by T. Chown. We
didn't added a note about rfc3956 as we are defining a bit
reserved in 3306.
o Because of the previous comment, the wording has been changed to
indicate we are reserving a bit in the unicast prefix-based
address not reserving a prefix for ASM. The rationale behind that
is to encourage implementations check the value of the
reserved bit rather than matching a prefix.
o Clarify the meaning of "x" as requested by Behcet.
o Behcet asked to reserve a /17 or /12 for ASM. We didn't considered
that comment because we received in the past comments arguing that
reserving /17 is a waste of multicast address space. This is
documented in Section 3.1 of the draft.
o Implemented some wording changes suggested by P. Koch.
o Update the section with examples.
A detailed diff is available at:
http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-mboned-64-multicast-address-format-04.
Cheers,
Med
>-----Message d'origine-----
>De : ipv6-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ipv6-boun...@ietf.org] De
>la part de mohamed.boucad...@orange.com
>Envoyé : jeudi 16 août 2012 07:45
>À : Bob Hinden
>Cc : ipv6@ietf.org;
>draft-ietf-mboned-64-multicast-address-for...@tools.ietf.org;
>Jacni Qin; Stig Venaas
>Objet : RE: draft-ietf-mboned-64-multicast-address-format
>
>Dear Bob,
>
>The main changes in -03 are as follows:
>
>* Abandon the M-bit idea to represent IPv4-embedded IPv6
>multicast prefix
>
>* Explain the rationale for selecting a /96 (SSM) and /20 (ASM)
>
>* Reserve two prefixes to be used for the algorithmic
>translation of an IPv6 multicast address into an IPv4 one; and
>vice versa
>(1) ff3x:0:8000::/96 for SSM
>(2) ffxx:8000::/20 for ASM
>
>* The document does not update RFC4291; i.e., no change to the
>IPv6 addressing architecture.
>
>Cheers,
>Med
>
>>-----Message d'origine-----
>>De : Bob Hinden [mailto:bob.hin...@gmail.com]
>>Envoyé : mardi 14 août 2012 17:33
>>À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed OLNC/NAD/TIP
>>Cc : Bob Hinden; ipv6@ietf.org; Jacni Qin;
>>draft-ietf-mboned-64-multicast-address-for...@tools.ietf.org;
>>Stig Venaas
>>Objet : Re: draft-ietf-mboned-64-multicast-address-format
>>
>>Med,
>>
>>The new draft appears to have many changes from the previous
>>version. It would be helpful if you could describe the
>>changes. This is usually done in the draft itself, but I
>>didn't see it in -03.
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Bob
>>
>>On Aug 14, 2012, at 2:09 AM, <mohamed.boucad...@orange.com>
>><mohamed.boucad...@orange.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> I'm initiating this thread in the hope of understanding the
>>> objections from the 6man WG and hopefully to make some progress for
>>> this document. To initiate the discussion, below are provided some
>>> preliminary Q/A:
>>>
>>> What is the scope of this document?
>>> The document specifies an algorithmic translation of an IPv6
>>> multicast address to a corresponding IPv4 multicast address, and
>>> vice versa. The document reserves two IPv6 multicast prefixes to
>>> be used for that purpose.
>>>
>>> What are these reserved prefixes?
>>> * ff3x:0:8000::/96 for SSM
>>> * ffxx:8000::/20 for ASM
>>>
>>> Does this document update IPv6 addressing architecture?
>>> No.
>>>
>>> Is there a unicast counterpart of this proposal?
>>> Yes, RFC6052.
>>>
>>> What is the problem to be solved?
>>> There are several use cases as detailed in [I-D.ietf-mboned-v4v6-
>>> mcast-ps]. In particular, the following use cases are of
>>> interest:
>>> 1. An IPv6-only receiver wants to receive multicast content from
>>> an IPv4-only source (6-4).
>>> 2. An IPv4 receiver wants to join a multicast group in IPv4
>>> domain via an IPv6-only network (4-6-4).
>>>
>>> Are there solutions for the unicast counterpart of these use cases?
>>> Yes; various solutions including:
>>> 1. 6-4: RFC6146
>>> 2. 4-6-4: RFC6333, RFC6346, ...
>>>
>>> The latest version of the document is available at:
>>>
>>https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mboned-64-multicast-addr
>ess-format-03.
>>>
>>> Comments and suggestions are more than welcome.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Med
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
>>> ipv6@ietf.org
>>> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
>ipv6@ietf.org
>Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
