All things related to multicast

["Kevin C. Almeroth" <>]

>>So are you in favor of just leaving MSDP where it is (i.e.,
>>shutting down the WG and publishing what we have as experimental
>>or informational or?).

Any MSDP standard that requires changes from what is being done
today is, I think, a bad thing.

Therefore, as many problems (read: tradeoffs) as MSDP, as deployed,
has today, it should be given in an RFC...  now whether it is
informational, historical, or experimental, doesn't really matter.

Done.

Next question is whether to continue effort to standardize a 
better version of MSDP.  My opinion:  it doesn't really matter.
In fact, if it were standardized, it would probably do harm, e.g.
create confusion technically and WHO knows what the marketing folks
would do.  So maybe my opinion is to just drop it.

Done.

Next issue that john z. has brought up so eloquently:  the multicast
community really needs to get behind SSM.  Really...  REALLY!

>From an Internet2 perspective, John Brassil is maintaining a
"list of sources" page 
(http://multicast.internet2.edu/wg-multicast-sources.shtml).
Folks should send URLs to John.

We can create an SSM section that has the right URLs to do the right
things for the right applications.

Finally, as john z. also pointed out, there is lots of straightforward
things we can all be working on, but it seems we lack community-wide
leadership.

Maybe we can use Boulder's Joint Techs and/or the next IETF (MADDOGS?)
to at least identify a set of action items for SSM deployment and see
if we can't get people tasked with some of these work items.

I'll be at both of these meetings and wouldn't mind acting as scribe
and getting these things on some WWW site (I2 mcast pages?).

-Kevin