[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: IP-DVB: Notes from Atlanta
No, no BoF this time either!
So, what progress have we made?
- First, I promise to rev. the ID on the encapsulation, and will do
a call for comments to see if there any more changes needed / desirable.
There has been a recent ESA ITT issued to do some implementation of
this scheme and evaluation in a real link. so that should help this.
- I hope that people will start writing down their ideas on other
topics relating to security, MIBs, address resoltion, etc and prepare
for the next meeting in Vienna. I would like to see more than two IDs
so we can have a good range of topics and opinions....
- Finally I have been really busy since November, so some of the
lack of progress is my fault. I am sorry.
If you will be at the IETF in San Francisco, I'd like to talk to
find out what your views / needs are.... Email me please.
Gorry Fairhurst
Marshall Eubanks wrote:
>
> Will there be a meeting of this group in San Francisco ? If so, when ?
>
> On Friday, December 6, 2002, at 05:22 AM, Dr G Fairhurst wrote:
>
> >
> > There was an unofficial meeting of people from the ip-dvb list at 5:30pm
> > after the IETF meeting on 20th November.
> >
> > Here's a brief summary of what was discussed.
> >
> > New encapsulation
> > -----------------
> > Discussion again about "why" this was needed?
> > - Was it processing efficiency in software?
> > - Was it to improve bandwidth utilisation?
> > - Was it to help standardise features? (add new features?)
> > All were true, but motivation depends heavily on the intended
> > application.
> > There were some plans to do pilot implementations in 2003.
> >
> > Simple configuration of clients
> > -------------------------------
> > "plug & play" . How could we make schemes for DVB/ATSC so
> > that were flexible and allowed IPv6 autoconfiguration?
> > - this implied the ability to do flexible IP address to PID
> > and TS-MUX mapping.
> >
> > There was some discussion of the recent draft from DVB
> > "ETSI EN drTS 102 00X V0.4.2 (2002-07)
> > Digital Video Broadcasting (DVB)
> > Specification for IP Notification in DVB Systems
> > Use of the IP/MAC Notification Table"
> >
> > - How general-purpose was this?
> > - Would it scale to large IP edge networks?
> > - How would it relate to the way IP multicast seemed
> > to be going (see discussions about the future of
> > multicast in mboned WG
> > & "draft-ietf-mboned-iesg-gap-analysis-00.txt")
> >
> > Unfortunately few people had access to this document,
> > since it is currently private to DVB members.
> >
> > Those who did have access to the document said they would look
> > at it and see what they thought. The current requirements
> > ID suggested three potential options:
> >
> > (i) Use the SI information for address resolution.
> > (ii) Provide an alternative mechanism at the IP-level
> > - similar to IPv6 ND?
> > (ii) Provide a complementary scheme at the IP-level
> > - similar to IPv6 ND, but able to import information
> > from SI tables (if able to).
> >
> > - Which should be done? - Why?
> >
> > The main challenge was to figure out what ELSE was necessary
> > to make the framework auto-configuartion flexible and
> > IP-friendly.
> >
> > Please send questions and answers on the list.
> >
> > Plans
> > -----
> > There is now some enthusiasm now to start work on this in 2003,
> > and several promises of contributions (IDs) have been received
> > by Gorry Fairhurst. When we get sufficient Internet Drafts
> > on the table, so we can start doing the real work!
> >
> > Afterwards we adjourned to the "Polaris" bar to literally watch the
> > world spin by...
> >
> > Gorry Fairhurst
> > ip-dvb mailing list.
> >
> Regards
> Marshall Eubanks
>
> T.M. Eubanks
> Multicast Technologies, Inc.
> Phone : 703-293-9601 Fax : 703-293-9609
> e-mail : tme@multicasttech.com
> http://www.multicasttech.com
>
> Our New Multicast Workshop :
> http://www.multicasttech.com/workshop
> Test your network for multicast :
> http://www.multicasttech.com/mt/