Subject: [DMM] Section 4.7

From: Behcet Sarikaya <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2013 14:45:59 -0500

Hi Jouni, all,

I have concerns on the text in this section.
It seems like this text has mainly been contributed by Seil.
No offense to Seil, please.

Let me explain the background here: when DMM discussed some solution
proposals in the past, in Multimob, we had a few out of charter slots to
discuss DMM multicast. Seil was a presenter. We had other presenters as
well.

The discussions produced no consensus. Since then we stopped such
discussions.

Also, let me explain the background on RFC 6224 here:
Multimob developed RFC 6224 with the first charter which required no
protocol extensions. Since then this requirement has been removed and we
developed some solutions we might even develop an alternative solution.

Hope this clarifies my concern.

Regards,

Behcet

---

From: Jouni <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2013 09:43:02 +0300

Behcet,

> I have concerns on the text in this section.

Could you pinpoint which part of the text and propose changes.

- Jouni

> Let me explain the background here: when DMM discussed some solution proposals in the past, in Multimob, we had a few out of charter slots to discuss DMM multicast. Seil was a presenter. We had other presenters as well.
> 
> The discussions produced no consensus. Since then we stopped such discussions.
> 
> Multimob developed RFC 6224 with the first charter which required no protocol extensions. Since then this requirement has been removed and we developed some solutions we might even develop an alternative solution.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dmm mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm