Editor's Note: Minutes received 11/25/92 CURRENT_MEETING_REPORT_ Reported by Paul Tsuchiya/Bellcore Minutes of the Inter-Domain Multicast Routing BOF (IDMR) Agenda 1. Determine the Charter of the Group. 2. Go over the CBT (Core Based Trees), a proposal for scalable multicast routing. The first IDMR Bof was held November 17th at the Washington, DC IETF meeting. It was chaired by Tony Ballardie of UCL. Tony amply demonstrated early on in the meeting that the English had best stick to dry humor, and leave the wacky stuff to the Americans (MP notwithstanding). Paul Tsuchiya was scribe, and these Minutes were written by him. Concerning Agenda item 1, it was agreed that there is a need for a new multicast protocol for inter-domain multicast, as the existing schemes do not scale well enough. Therefore, it was decided that: 1. A Working Group should be formed (the IDMR Working Group), and 2. The charter of the Group is to design a standard multicast routing protocol for inter-domain multicast routing. Though there was no explicit call for consensus, it was assumed that Tony Ballardie would Chair the Group, with Paul Tsuchiya as alternate Chair. I assume that it is still possible for people to volunteer to Chair the Group. Also, there was no consensus (for or against) that CBT should serve as the base text for the new IDMR protocol. On the other hand, no other proposals are on the table. Concerning Agenda item 2, the following concerns were raised about CBT. o There was a concern that the current Internet-Draft didn't adequately specify the case where a node receives two joint requests before getting back the first ack. o The choice of which major core to send terminate request messages to is not specified correctly. o It was felt that there must be a way for detecting the case where there are two cores with uptree links on the same LAN. o The format for the core list packet must be worked out, and the 1 drawing in the CBT document is hard to understand. o There was a concern that the text describing when to send a quit request was not complete. o The notion of sending a quit some time after receiving a join ack (when changing parents) is no good (should send quit immediately). o There was a lot of discussion about what to do when the link to the parent goes down. This whole issue needs to be worked out, but there seemed to be a general preference for flushing the whole tree below the break, with everything below subsequently rejoining. Attendees Anthony Ballardie A.Ballardie@cs.ucl.ac.uk Tony Bates t.bates@nosc.ja.net Scott Brim Scott_Brim@cornell.edu Michael Collins collinsms@es.net Barbara Denny denny@erg.sri.com Hans Eriksson hans@sics.se Roger Fajman raf@cu.nih.gov Dino Farinacci dino@cisco.com Shoji Fukutomi fuku@furukawa.co.jp Joel Halpern jmh@network.com Don Hoffman don.hoffman@eng.sun.com Dwight Jamieson djamies@bnr.ca Oliver Jones oj@pictel.com Paulina Knibbe knibbe@cisco.com Jim Knowles jknowles@binky.arc.nasa.gov John Krawczyk jkrawczy@wellfleet.com Padma Krishnaswamy kri@sabre.bellcore.com Greg Minshall minshall@wc.novell.com John Moy jmoy@proteon.com Jim Perchik perchik@athena.mit.edu Thomas Pusateri pusateri@cs.duke.edu Benny Rodrig 4373580@mcimail.com Henning Schulzrinne hgs@research.att.com Martha Steenstrup msteenst@bbn.com Tang Tang tt@virginia.edu Paul Tsuchiya tsuchiya@thumper.bellcore.com Ioannis Viniotis candice@ececho.ncsu.edu