Subject: Re: A technical discussion on multicast

From: Masataka Ohta <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 28 Feb 98 10:30:59 JST

Dino;

> >> For example, if two organizations belonging to different domains
> >> want to deploy intra-domain multicast between them, they can't.
> 
>     But I see many cases where they have.

No, you don't.

What you see is a case where users are ignoring domain boundaries
and IDMR architecture. Users are using not-a-intra-domain multicast
between them.

> >> Read the spec.
> 
>     I didn't read it, I wrote part of it.   ;-)

OK. That can be an apologies that the spec is poorly written.

> >> PIM-SM and CBT does not scale, because they depend on flooding
> >> within unicast routing domain structure developped around unicast
> >> routing protocols.
> 
>     That is not true, there are implementations can use the DVMRP routing 
>     table as well as MBGP. They too are deployed. So I don't know where your
>     coming from.

Which part are you trying to say "not ture"?

Are you saying that DVMRP and MBGP scales because they are
deployed?

Or are you saying neither DVMRP nor MBGP are using flooding
within unicast routing domain structure developped around unicast
routing protocols to let their routing table available to
all the routers in the domain?

Or are you just not calling it flooding to distribute some information
over all the routers in a domain?

> >> I heard you had a proposal to solve it with DNS. But you are too
> >> much constrained by the idea of inter and intra domain things
> >> that your proposal will not work.
> 
>     If you mean the constraints you listed above, I don't buy that.

No. There are many. But I don't think detailed analysis meaningful.
The bottom line is, DNS is not a magic and can't solve all the
problems. Note that IPng WG has made similar mistakes on DNS issues.

						Masataka Ohta

---

From: Dino Farinacci <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 22:51:06 -0800 (PST)

>> No, you don't.

    So, now your telling me what I see? This thread is going down hill
    real quick with respect to productiveness.

>> and IDMR architecture. Users are using not-a-intra-domain multicast

    Does "not-a-intra-domain multicast" mean it's an inter-domain multicast?
    This makes no sense.

>> Which part are you trying to say "not ture"?

    The flooding around unicast routing protocols you refer to.

>> Are you saying that DVMRP and MBGP scales because they are

    Yes. It is scaling in the current environment. It's a lot better than 
    saying something else that hasn't been deployed can scale. But your
    not even saying that. Your just stating problems, aren't you.

    So, if IDMR is doing everything wrong, why aren't you submitting a
    superior proposal?

    You know a lot of smart people are working on this problem and have been
    for many years. You should give them the benefit of the doubt they know
    what they are talking about. If you will not, I await to review your
    proposal.

>> problems. Note that IPng WG has made similar mistakes on DNS issues.

    We are not trying to solve all problems with DNS. But it is handy to
    use and is widely deployed and can lead us in the right direction to
    solving *some* problems.

    So when can I see your Internet Draft?

Dino

---

From: Masataka Ohta <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 28 Feb 98 16:18:40 JST

Dino;

> >> No, you don't.
> 
>     So, now your telling me what I see?

Yes, because you said you saw intra-domain multicast used between
domains, I tell you what you saw was not-a-intra-domain multicast
used between domains.

> This thread is going down hill real quick with respect to productiveness.

Yes. And it is your problem.

>     Does "not-a-intra-domain multicast" mean it's an inter-domain multicast?

No.

You are a very good example of a victim of the way of thinking
of IDMR school.

There are three kinds of multicast:

	intra-domain

	inter-domain

	unrelated to domain

>     Yes.

Then, it's a waste of time to talk with you about the scalability.

>     So, if IDMR is doing everything wrong, why aren't you submitting a

There already are.

>     for many years.

No, I don't know the intelligence of them. The smartness of them
will be judged by the reactions on scalability discussions.

>     So when can I see your Internet Draft?

At least after I come back from vacation next week.

							Masataka Ohta