From owner-bmwg@ironbridgenetworks.com Thu Jun 22 17:58:23 2000 Return-Path: Received: from ironbridgenetworks.com (ironbridge-t1-gw.mbo.ma.ultra.net [146.115.17.90]) by dokka.maxware.no (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA20219 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 17:58:18 +0200 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by ironbridgenetworks.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA24777 for x-bmwg-include; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 11:52:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from exchange1.netcomsystems.com (mushroom.netcomsystems.com [12.9.24.195]) by ironbridgenetworks.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA24721 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 11:52:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: by EXCHANGE1 with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 08:52:26 -0700 Message-ID: <9384475DFC05D2118F9C00805F6F2631018A54AA@EXCHANGE1> From: "Perser, Jerry" To: "BMWG (E-mail)" Subject: Comments on Multicast Methodology Draft Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 08:52:17 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01BFDC61.DAD99336" Sender: owner-bmwg@ironbridgenetworks.com Precedence: bulk This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFDC61.DAD99336 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I have a few comments on the draft: Every test starts with a definition, but no objectives. I am not sure = why restating RFC 2432 is so important. In the introduction you tell the = reader to read RFC 2432. What would be very helpful is an objective (see RFC = 2544) to each of the tests. Some of the terminology used is confusing: 1. "Destination ports" versus "receiving ports". Section 3 uses both = terms. At first I though these were the same thing. At second glance, maybe = they are two different things. Can you clarity what a "receiving port" is = and what a "destination port" is? How are the related? 2. "Non-homogenous network environment". This infers something is dissimilar in the network, but does not state if it is layer 1, layer = 2, layer 3. The first time I read this I though Ethernet versus ATM. Is = the term mixed-class more appropriate? 3. "Bandwidth". This term has not been defined by the IETF. I have = seen it used in two in different definitions. The current definition is to add = the offered load to the forwarding rate to find the bandwidth of a = switching device. I don't know who's marketing department started this (I have = heard two different stories) and I don't agree with it. We SHOULD avoid this = term until it is clearly defined in an RFC like throughput, or Maximum = Offered Load. 4. "line rate". RFC 2285 defined a term Maximum Offered Load. Can we = use this term instead of a non-IETF term? Where are Appendix A equations? Appendix A has a discussion and an = example of a method for distribution. But there are no equations, formulas or pseudo code. I have asked for this two times already. Are the = equations proprietary? ___________________________________________________________=20 Jerry Perser=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0Phone: = 818.676.2320=20 SmartLab Manager=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 Lab: 818.676.2337=20 Netcom Systems = Inc.=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0Fax:=A0=A0=A0818.880.9165=A0=A0=A0=A0=20 26750 Agoura Road=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0Corp: 818.676.2300=20 Calabasas, CA, 91302 Pager:=A08185963000.0089988@pagenet.net =A0=20 ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFDC61.DAD99336 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Comments on Multicast Methodology Draft

I have a few comments on the draft:

Every test starts with a definition, but no = objectives.  I am not sure why restating RFC 2432 is so = important.  In the introduction you tell the reader to read RFC = 2432.  What would be very helpful is an objective (see RFC 2544) = to each of the tests.

Some of the terminology used is confusing:

1. "Destination ports" versus = "receiving ports".  Section 3 uses both terms.  At = first I though these were the same thing.  At second glance, maybe = they are two different things.  Can you clarity what a = "receiving port" is and what a "destination port" = is?  How are the related?

2. "Non-homogenous network = environment".  This infers something is dissimilar in the = network, but does not state if it is layer 1, layer 2, layer 3.  = The first time I read this I though Ethernet versus ATM.  Is the = term mixed-class more appropriate?

3. "Bandwidth".  This term has not = been defined by the IETF.  I have seen it used in two in different = definitions.  The current definition is to add the offered load to = the forwarding rate to find the bandwidth of a switching device.  = I don't know who's marketing department started this (I have heard two = different stories) and I don't agree with it.  We SHOULD avoid = this term until it is clearly defined in an RFC like throughput, or = Maximum Offered Load.

4. "line rate".  RFC 2285 defined a = term Maximum Offered Load.  Can we use this term instead of a = non-IETF term?

Where are Appendix A equations? Appendix A has a = discussion and an example of a method for distribution.  But there = are no equations, formulas or pseudo code.  I have asked for this = two times already.  Are the equations proprietary?

___________________________________________________________ =
Jerry = Perser=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0Phone: 818.676.2320 =
SmartLab = Manager=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0      Lab:   = 818.676.2337
Netcom Systems = Inc.=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0Fax:=A0=A0=A0818.880.9165=A0=A0=A0=A0 =
26750 Agoura = Road=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0Corp:  818.676.2300
Calabasas, CA, = 91302       = Pager:=A08185963000.0089988@pagenet.net

=A0

------_=_NextPart_001_01BFDC61.DAD99336--