Proposals:
1) Discussion about alternate multicast instance identification: Historically, a multicast instance is identified by some unique (?) multicast address. Meanwhile there is also ssm, where the multicast instance is identified by the sender's unicast address plus some multicast-address from some ssm-specific range. Proposal: Use a new multicast-protocol type plus the sender's unicast address. Con: Existing (deployed) multicast services have to be changed. Pro: 1 billion IPv4-addresses would be freed for unicast which is quite a lot while facing the address depletion issue. The discussion should be led by ISP folks. I think, they would know best the costs as well as the benefits. 2) State-less multicast for about 99 % of the involved routers by means of cascade tree multicast Example: By employing a cascade degree =10 about 90 % of the receivers wouldn't even become aware of being involved in some multicast activity.Assuming 20 hops in average between any two nodes of the cascade tree, only a half percent of the involved routers have be cascade tree multicast knowledgable. Heiner
_______________________________________________ rrg mailing list rrg@irtf.org http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
