Subject: [MBONED] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-perreault-mboned-igmp-mld-translation-00.txt

From: Simon Perreault <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 11:52:28 -0500

Hi,

We posted a new draft on MLD/IGMP translation. Comments would be highly 
appreciated.

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-perreault-mboned-igmp-mld-translation-00

Simon & Tina

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: New Version Notification for 
draft-perreault-mboned-igmp-mld-translation-00.txt
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 08:22:59 -0800
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
CC: [email-masked], [email-masked]

A new version of I-D, draft-perreault-mboned-igmp-mld-translation-00.txt 
has been successfully submitted by Simon Perreault and posted to the 
IETF repository.

Filename:	 draft-perreault-mboned-igmp-mld-translation
Revision:	 00
Title:		 Internet Group Management Protocol (IGMP) / Multicast Listener 
Discovery (MLD)-Based Multicast Translation (&quot;IGMP/MLD 
Translation&quot;)
Creation date:	 2012-02-24
WG ID:		 Individual Submission
Number of pages: 15

Abstract:
    This document describes translation between IPv4 and IPv6 of
    multicast flows by an IGMP/MLD proxy.  This allows single-stack nodes
    to participate in multicast groups from a different address family.
    Both sending and receiving is supported by this translation
    mechanism.  Both any-source and source-specific multicast (ASM and
    SSM) are supported as well.

The IETF Secretariat

---

From: Tom Taylor <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 16:04:53 -0500

Looks good. Two comments:

1) The address formatting draft reference is now
        draft-ietf-mboned-64-multicast-address-format-00

2) Is a discussion of MTU, reassembly on the upstream side, and 
fragmentation on the downstream side needed for data transmission, or is 
that something to take for granted?

On 24/02/2012 11:52 AM, Simon Perreault wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> MBONED mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mboned
>

---

From: Simon Perreault <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 16:15:32 -0500

> draft-ietf-mboned-64-multicast-address-format-00

Will update. Thanks.

> that something to take for granted?

It is very pertinent, and it is already discussed in RFC6145, to which 
we refer. Section 1.4 in particular contains pointers.
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6145#section-1.4

One things that could need more discussion here is whether we want to 
perform stateful fragment reassembly (as described in [RFC6146]) or do 
we prefer to remain stateless all the way (thus limiting ourselves to 
[RFC6145]).

Simon
-- 
DTN made easy, lean, and smart --> http://postellation.viagenie.ca
NAT64/DNS64 open-source        --> http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca
STUN/TURN server               --> http://numb.viagenie.ca