1 / 6

Thomas C. Schmidt t.schmidt@ieee HAW Hamburg

Mobile Multicast Sender Support in PMIPv6 Domains with Base Multicast Deployment draft-schmidt-multimob-pmipv6-base-source-00. Thomas C. Schmidt t.schmidt@ieee.org HAW Hamburg . Objective of the Draft .

kacy
Download Presentation

Thomas C. Schmidt t.schmidt@ieee HAW Hamburg

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Mobile Multicast Sender Support in PMIPv6 Domains with Base Multicast Deploymentdraft-schmidt-multimob-pmipv6-base-source-00 Thomas C. Schmidt t.schmidt@ieee.org HAW Hamburg

  2. Objective of the Draft • Clarify operations of mobile multicast sources at basic deployment of multicast support in PMIPv6 domains – i.e., source mobility in the scenario of draft-ietf-multimob-pmipv6-base-solution • Demystification: it works • Informational work: No new protocols needed • Pragmatic base approach as for listeners: • Suboptimal routes are price for simplicity

  3. DR or MLD Proxy MLD Proxy forwards locally and per Uplink Multicast Base Deployment with Mobile Source +-------------+ | Multicast | | Receivers | +-------------+ / \ +----+ +----+ |LMA1| |LMA2| Multicast Anchor +----+ +----+ LMAA1 | | LMAA2 | | \\ //\\ \\ // \\ \\ // \\ Unicast Tunnel \\ // \\ \\ // \\ \\ // \\ Proxy-CoA1 || || Proxy-CoA2 +----+ +----+ |MAG1| |MAG2| MLD Proxy +----+ +----+ | | | MN-HNP1 | | MN-HNP2 | MN-HNP3 MN1 MN2 MN3 Multicast Senders & Receivers

  4. Efficiency Issues • Routing is optimal for receivers at the sender’s MAG that belong to the same LMA, and for the fixed Internet • Routing detours via LMAs, whenever • Mobile listener is attached to another MAG • Mobile listener is associated with a different LMA • No way to suppress the forwarding uplink to LMA • Admission control/rate limiting may be desirable to prevent flooding LMAs

  5. Summary & Outcome • This draft explains source mobility in the base scenario • Traffic flows/aggregation may be optimal, but need not be • Draft extends minimal solution to senders • Does not exhaust the issues of source mobility Question to WG: Make this a quick informational source or Extend to optimized routing solution?

  6. Questions?

More Related