#21: Some use cases assume IP multicast is not part of the Internet architecture
Many of the current use cases have an underlying motivation that can be
characterized as some form of isolation or separation, where different
hosts on the same link should use different ISPs. That separation only
applies to unicast. Should a host need to send or receive IP multicast
packets, it will interact with all routers on the link. (And even in the
case of a host with multiple interfaces, a /0 prefix route doesn't have an
impact on multicast sending and receiving.)
The working group seems intent on rewriting the use case section from
scratch, hence I will not go into the details of which of the current use
cases makes the assumption that we can ignore the existence of IP
multicast. But this ticket should be taken into account when formulating
the new use cases to make sure the things are clear with respect to the
support for IP multicast.
Note that even if IP multicast isn't deployed Internet-wide, there are
potentially issues even locally if multicast DNS is used and different
gateways needs to expose different mDNS information to the subsets of
hosts on the link that they should serve.
--
---------------------------+--------------------------------------------
Reporter: nordmark@… | Owner: draft-ietf-mif-api-extension@…
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone:
Component: api-extension | Version:
Severity: - | Keywords:
---------------------------+--------------------------------------------
Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/mif/trac/ticket/21>
mif <http://tools.ietf.org/mif/>
_______________________________________________
mif mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif
