Subject: Please all respond: Call for the ipdvb WG to adopt: draft-fair-ipdvb-ar-04.txt

From: Gorry Fairhurst <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 16:33:29 +0100

As WG chair, I request the ipdvb list to consider whether the WG is
ready to support adoption of the following individual Internet Draft
(ID) as a WG ID. By adopting an individual ID as a working group ID,
this WG indicates that it intends to be develop this into an RFC,
according to the WG charter.

WG documents should no longer be regarded as the property of the
individuals who originally authored them - the working group as a
whole must decide how they are shaped, and to see the document to a
successful conclusion. If adopted, the Internet Draft will be renamed
to start with the filename draft-ietf-ipdvb..., and will be listed on
the IETF web page for this WG.

---

         Title           : Address Resolution for IP datagrams over
                           MPEG-2 networks
         Author(s)       : G. Fairhurst, et al.
         Filename        : draft-fair-ipdvb-ar-04.txt
         Pages           : 17
         Date            : 2005-4-12

    This document describes the process of binding/associating IPv4/IPv6
    addresses with MPEG-2 Transport Streams (TS). This procedure is
    known as Address Resolution (AR), or Neighbour Discovery (ND). Such
    address resolution complements the higher layer resource discovery
    tools that are used to advertise IP sessions. In MPEG-2 networks, an
    IP address must be associated with a Packet ID (PID) and a specific
    Transmission Multiplex The document reviews current methods. It also
    describes the interaction with well-known protocols for address
    management including DHCP, ARP, and NDP, and provides guidance on
    usage.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-fair-ipdvb-ar-04.txt

---

You are encouraged to send email to this WG, to help make the decision
for adoption.  Possible recommendations are:

       1) Support for adoption as a working group draft under our Charter -
       i.e. Recommend this Internet Draft SHOULD be used as the basis for
       developing an RFC by the ipdvb WG.

       2) Request for non-adoption
       i.e. That there is (or could be) alternative approaches to
       the problem, and that the current draft is not sufficiently
       developed / or correctly designed ipdvb WG

       3) Out of scope
       i.e. you believe the document to be beyond the scope of the
       approved ipdvb WG charter.

Emails on this topic should be sent to the ipdvb mailing list before
6th May 2005.

Note that an ID does not need to be complete to be adopted. It would
also be most useful to collect as many comments/criticisms as possible
from those reading this ID.  Looking through the archived mailing
list, a first list of issues to be addressed is included at the end of
this email.

Please do help to identify any more known (or potential) issues that
should be addressed/discussed.

Best wishes,

Gorry Fairhurst
(ipdvb WG Chair)

---

From: Bernhard Collini-Nocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 08:02:14 +0200

Dear Gorry,

I vote for recommendation 1).

Kind regards,
Bernhard

---

From: Martin Stiemerling <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 13:31:31 +0200

Hi all,

I vote for WG ID.

  Martin

--On Montag, 25. April 2005 16:33 Uhr +0100 Gorry Fairhurst 
<[email-masked]> wrote:

| As WG chair, I request the ipdvb list to consider whether the WG is
| ready to support adoption of the following individual Internet Draft
| (ID) as a WG ID. By adopting an individual ID as a working group ID,
| this WG indicates that it intends to be develop this into an RFC,
| according to the WG charter.
|
| WG documents should no longer be regarded as the property of the
| individuals who originally authored them - the working group as a
| whole must decide how they are shaped, and to see the document to a
| successful conclusion. If adopted, the Internet Draft will be renamed
| to start with the filename draft-ietf-ipdvb..., and will be listed on
| the IETF web page for this WG.
|
|
| ---
|
|          Title           : Address Resolution for IP datagrams over
|                            MPEG-2 networks
|          Author(s)       : G. Fairhurst, et al.
|          Filename        : draft-fair-ipdvb-ar-04.txt
|          Pages           : 17
|          Date            : 2005-4-12
|
|     This document describes the process of binding/associating IPv4/IPv6
|     addresses with MPEG-2 Transport Streams (TS). This procedure is
|     known as Address Resolution (AR), or Neighbour Discovery (ND). Such
|     address resolution complements the higher layer resource discovery
|     tools that are used to advertise IP sessions. In MPEG-2 networks, an
|     IP address must be associated with a Packet ID (PID) and a specific
|     Transmission Multiplex The document reviews current methods. It also
|     describes the interaction with well-known protocols for address
|     management including DHCP, ARP, and NDP, and provides guidance on
|     usage.
|
| A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
| http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-fair-ipdvb-ar-04.txt
|
| ---
|
| You are encouraged to send email to this WG, to help make the decision
| for adoption.  Possible recommendations are:
|
|        1) Support for adoption as a working group draft under our Charter
| -
|        i.e. Recommend this Internet Draft SHOULD be used as the basis for
|        developing an RFC by the ipdvb WG.
|
|        2) Request for non-adoption
|        i.e. That there is (or could be) alternative approaches to
|        the problem, and that the current draft is not sufficiently
|        developed / or correctly designed ipdvb WG
|
|        3) Out of scope
|        i.e. you believe the document to be beyond the scope of the
|        approved ipdvb WG charter.
|
| Emails on this topic should be sent to the ipdvb mailing list before
| 6th May 2005.
|
| Note that an ID does not need to be complete to be adopted. It would
| also be most useful to collect as many comments/criticisms as possible
| from those reading this ID.  Looking through the archived mailing
| list, a first list of issues to be addressed is included at the end of
| this email.
|
| Please do help to identify any more known (or potential) issues that
| should be addressed/discussed.
|
| Best wishes,
|
| Gorry Fairhurst
| (ipdvb WG Chair)
|

---

From: "Charalabos Skianis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 15:29:00 +0300

Hi,

I vote for WG ID.

Harry

|     This document describes the process of binding/associating
IPv4/IPv6
|     known as Address Resolution (AR), or Neighbour Discovery (ND).
Such
|     tools that are used to advertise IP sessions. In MPEG-2 networks,
an
|     IP address must be associated with a Packet ID (PID) and a
specific
|     Transmission Multiplex The document reviews current methods. It
also
|        1) Support for adoption as a working group draft under our
Charter
|        i.e. Recommend this Internet Draft SHOULD be used as the basis
for

---

From: Fausto Vieira <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 16:18:02 +0200

Dear all,

This is the first time I see this document.

I also vote for WG ID.

Nonetheless, here are my remarks on the current version of the document:

The following sentence is duplicated in the draft (page 5):
"The all 1s PID value indicates a Null TS Packet introduced to maintain 
a constant bit rate of a TS Multiplex. There is no required relationship 
between the PID values used for TS Logical Channels transmitted using 
different TS Multiplexes."

This sentence is also duplicated (page 5):
"PSI: Program Specific Information [ISO-MPEG2]. PSI is used to convey 
information about services carried in a TS Multiplex. It is carried in 
one of four specifically identified table section constructs 
[ISO-MPEG2], see also SI Table.

Spelling error:
"Multicast address resolution occurs at one level in associating a 
specific L2 address with _am_ IP Group Destination Address"
Change the underlined to "an"

Spelling error:
"The principle drawbacks are that _while_ the INT, there is a need for a 
Gateway to introduce associated PSI/SI MPEG-2 control information."
Change the underlined to "with"

Spelling error:
"(...) or parts of the network where gateway devices isolate the MPEG 
devices from the larger Internet creating virtual MPEG2 private networks.)"
Move the last parentheses to before the period mark.

Spelling error:
"The ND protocol of IPv6 [RFC2461] may be used.NDP does not require (...)"
Insert a <space> after the period mark.

Spelling error:
"The ND protocol of IPv6 [RFC2461] may be used with The LLC/SNAP format 
of MPE.  NDP does not require(...)"
Remove the 2nd <space> after the period mark.

Cheers

Fausto Vieira

---

From: "Simon Teh" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 23:13:27 +0800

Dear members,

I vote the recommendation no.1

Best Regards,
Simon Teh
Universiti Sains Malaysia
-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On
Behalf Of Gorry Fairhurst
Sent: 25 April 2005 23:33
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Please all respond: Call for the ipdvb WG to adopt:
draft-fair-ipdvb-ar-04.txt

---

---

       3) Out of scope

Best wishes,

Gorry Fairhurst
(ipdvb WG Chair)

---

From: Gorry Fairhurst <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 16:46:22 +0100

Thanks for noting the typos, it's always good to know people have read the 
documents - these typos will be fixed in the next revision of the draft.

Gorry

---

From: nurul <[email-masked]>
Date: 27 Apr 2005 11:13:09 +0800

voting for no. 1

---

From: Chen Zhigao <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 11:27:02 +0800

I am happy to see the AR I-D to be put forward and become a WG draft.

--Zhigao