Subject: [MBONED] MBONED mins from Prague

From: Leonard Giuliano <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2019 14:37:27 -0700

Here are draft meeting mins from Prague (thanks Toerless!).  Please take a 
look while it's still fresh on the mind and let us know if you see 
anything that should be corrected.

-----
Chair slides

Chairs reviewing active WG docs, most of them shown here today, most of 
them likely ready for WGLC .

Sandy would like more review of mboned-multicast-yang-model-01!

Other docs: jholland-mboned-ambi-01

Jake Holland: Please take a look at this, Jake wants to make a viable 
attempt at implementing for browsers. Browsers need authentication to 
accept. Its unclear whether this doc itself should go through mboned (as 
opposed to other group), but must have mboned review. He will also do 
another update (hopefully before montreal).

-----

Charlie Perkins: multicast considerations over 802.11 wireless media
Update after IETF103.a mostly editorial comments (see first slide of 
presentation).
Discussion from hackathon, email from David lamparter / Jake holland.
Greg Shepherd: been following this thread too. What "commercial solution"
room consensus: APs (jake)
Toerless: only new thing seems to be the automatic choice , conversion to 
unicast
is well known
Mike McBride: draft mentions multicast/unicast conversion, but at least 
mention
the automatic conversion.
Greg: Original root problem
Charles: probably Aruba product. Maybe situation will clarify
Mikael Abrahamson: document does not need to be perfect. We still have a 
problem and
want to get work on solution - not all vendors do this. In general it’s 
not done
Jake: make sure deployment problem is well written
Toerless: maybe state: deployment problem is that users may not even know 
what the
AP does for multicast, so results of multicast services are all over the 
place.
Mikael: this meeting is recorded and shown on youtube.

More recent comments:
Move from SLAAC to DHCPv6
Mikael: Please do not put this suggestion into draft.
Kyle Rose:  disagrees. Would like to see this option, but mention security 
solution option.
Mikael: Lets keep solutions out of this document
Kyle: retract the suggestion
Mike McrBride; there are some proposed workarounds from document.
Toerless: taking out mentioning of workarounds is fine if we have plan for 
followup
work to describe workarounds/solution.
Warren Kumari: Maybe distinguish between operational workarounds and 
actual protocol/
implementation changes ?
Mikahel: leave in mitigation techniques, document is in my opinion good to 
go.
Jake Holland: Mitigation options. Sent text about AMT didn't see it in 
last draft.
Charlie: You sent another email about changing your mind.
Jake: Oops... maybe i change my mind again.
Mention unicast-based service discovery  (no comment about it).

Next steps slide.
Chair (Lenny): address last few comments, then send request for WGLC.
Plan for next steps ? NIS working group ?
Greg (Chair): We do not define solutions
Toerless: AMT ?
Lenny: We do transition solutions (AMT) and troubleshooting/operational 
tools (mtrace) but not routing/group membership protocols.

Did anything change in IEEE since last time ?
Charlie: not that i am aware of ?
Charlie: We can make recommendations to IEEE as well.
Mikahel: This is bigger than MBoned on solution side. We could go to IAB. 
Maybe
use less multicast ? Assumption is to deploy into 10base2 network, but not 
working
well over wifi ?! Someone needs to have strategic discussion where/how to 
proceed.
Mike McBride: In agreement with Mikael. Maybe not wait for montreal.
what to add ?
Charlie: will not make the SLAAC suggestion given how contentious.
Greg: changes seem to be fairly minor. See what discussion is on list.
Charlie: Already prepared rev5, not posted, will fix up with comments from 
room,
and then hopefully done.
Quick show of hands, there is room support for draft.
Lenny: rev it, request WGLC.
Warren Kumari: I am an author, so will not progress the document myself, 
some other AD has to do it.

------

Multicast in the Data Center Overview
draft-ietf-mboned-dc-deploy-05
Think it’s ready to be published. Included some forward looking things as 
ideas (SR with
multicast etc.) Primarily practice and deployment document.

Chairs: Who has read the documents, thinks is ready or last call ?
Stig: What is intended status/purpose ? BCP/informational.
Mike: informational (deployment) - not BCP.
Stig: fine, future stuff wouldn't fit BCP.
Jake: Typing up couple of editorial suggestions.
Mike: will ask for WGCL within next few weeks.

--------

Toerless 11:24 deprecating asm interdomain
last rev- mostly editorial changes, clarified IGMPv3/MLDv2 support for SSM 
(not just ASM)
wglc support in the room, uncontroversial, no comments
will request WGLC

--------

toerless 11:28 igmp questionnaire
stig 11:34: clarify "features"
stig 11:35: s/Implemented/deployed/ in #4 (toerless: ya, just missed 
global replace)
stig: unicast for sending reports, RFCs require it
toerless: implementors, not operators
stig: watch for security concerns

mikael 11:36: who can answer these?
toerless: i2 is our usual, maybe ripe also?
mikael: igmpv3/mldv2 support is different from (S,G) support, some STBs do 
not
toerless+mikael: deployment issues also include applications, they use v3 
but still join (*,G)
mikael: got another weird hack that was technically (S,G) but not general 
case

toerless: another application section in questionnaire
mikael: is there another way to capture this and avoid repeating mistakes?
lenny: joke meaning no.

charlie 11:40: long questionnaire = few responses, so pick top 4 and focus
toerless: hard to tighten this

Mikael/Toerless: Add section about application support for SSM (not really 
a PIM WG
issue, but important from MBoned): Does application only use "ASM" 
IGMPv3/MLDv2
signaling even if maybe the host stack supports IGMPv3/MLDv2
Also implemented only single source (S,G)

--------
draft-jholland-mboned-driad-amt-discovery

Jake: At Hackathon104 found out new issue, which will make me delay ask 
for WGLC
until after this is resolved. Issue is limitation of one-hop mDNS 
discovery
in home network (see slide for explanation).
Toerless: In cable routers DHCP feature exist to propagate DHCP options 
from SP.
Jake: generic workaround solution: DNS-SD propagation (via DNS-SD) will 
not work
generically. Solution is to rely on anycast address
Jake/toerlessL will take detail anycast discussion offline.
Jake: next steps. Fix anycast/DNS-SD ordering, then WGLC.
Mikael: Do you think it’s in pretty good shape ? Yes, except for anycast 
issue.
Jake: Yes.

--------

Lenny: Multicast to the Grandma (MTTG)- ubiquitous multicast
Lenny showing multicast stream sourced on MBONE (I2) through AMT relay to 
Internet (IP-multicast + AMT tunnel) (high quality).
Lenny: open source film under Creative Commons license, so no copyright 
laws are being violated

Toerless: Customers often have >100 Mbps with VDSL now - higher quality 
atttractive
but expensive in providing unicast.
Jake: Some higher bitrate

Slide Step 2 - AMT gateway implementation
Jake:  Do you know if gateways support L-flag (overload indication) ? No.
Toerless: how to find relay ?
Lenny: amt-relay.m2icast.net for relays (162.250.137.254,198.38.23.145).
Do not like anycast, too vulnerable to DoS attack (announce non-gateway to 
blackhole traffic).
Greg: Private anycast addresses ?
Lenny: suspect in the future, Anycast will be critical- each provider to 
use its own any cast address, but no one will use the global any cast 
address. Broker service, DNS, ...
Mikael- global anycast was a disaster with 6-to-4, so don’t use in the 
future
Lenny: thanks for confirming my suspicion that it was a bad idea.  Will 
keep not doing that!
MikeM: Kudos for making this happen. Awesome. Mentioned solutions like 
youtube-tv to watch live sports. Any long-term thoughts ? Productizing 
this ? Lenny: hold the thought.

Step 3: Multicast Content Portal (TV guide).
Step 4: Offnet sourcing.