Re: New draft on embedding the RP address in IPv6 multicast address

[Bill Nickless <nickless@mcs.anl.gov>]

At 08:24 AM 10/17/2002 -0400, Brian Haberman wrote:

> You're not wrong.  The key is convincing switch vendors to support
> IGMPv3 and MLDv2 snooping ASAP.  Tell your vendors you want/need
> this functionality.  And tell them that you want them to implement
> draft-ietf-magma-snoop-02.txt.
What you just wrote is the orthodox view in the IP multicast community.

When I read that, I hear the IP multicast community saying:

"We developed this IP multicast thing before 802.11 switches 
existed.  MAC-based receiver registration isn't needed on 
single-collision-domain 10Base5 Ethernet segments, so we didn't bother with 
that when we developed the IP multicast protocols like IGMP.

"If the world is going to use 802.11 MAC-based switches, well then the 
802.11 MAC-based switches had better emulate a single-collision-domain 
segment, interpreting IPv4/IGMP and IPv6/MLD datagrams as necessary.  We're 
not going to change our way of doing things because we were here first."


===
Bill Nickless    http://www.mcs.anl.gov/people/nickless      +1 630 252 7390
PGP:0E 0F 16 80 C5 B1 69 52 E1 44 1A A5 0E 1B 74 F7     nickless@mcs.anl.gov