Re: Use of SAP in a PIM SSM Network

[Jon Crowcroft <J.Crowcroft@cs.ucl.ac.uk>]

In message <200011161759.JAA05422@cisco.com>, Toerless Eckert typed:

 >>/4 Only if we can assume that we can not build scaling server infrastructures
 >>for large scale applications. I think we can. There must be something all
 >>those content server boxes will be good for. How about this ? Wasn't there
 >>sufficient research in distributed systems in the last 20 years to come up
 >>with appropriate solutions for larger scale applications, as long as you
 >>stick to some scenarios in the first place (instead of trying to solve
 >>it generically for all of them together in the network layer) ?

what i am tellng you is that there WASNT sufficient research in
distributed systems (i know - i was part of it:-)

IP level solutions are better at scaling for fault tolerance - most
the distributed server solutions are good up to Big Numbers like 3.

 >>> ok so you could have a hierarchy of redundant servers....,and what
 >>> standard internet protocoos are you going to use to manage those?

 >>Why does it have to be standardised in the IETF ? Why not some other place ?
 >>Why are things like CORBA not standardised in the IETF ? Don't those
 >>distributed applications relying on it run over the Internet also ?

oh boy, so we dont need to be able to buy multi-vendor solutions? dont
be silly.

 >>> no, i think we need to retain the deering multicast model and just
 >>> keep up the pressure on Large Router Vendors (this means you:-)
 >>> to be smart about scaling the routers up to meet the users
 >>> requirements rather than scaling the users expectations down to what
 >>> you want to do:-)

 >>We won't take the holy grail away, Lancelot ;-)

thanks....but it aint that hard if we buy juniper:-)

 >>I guess this router vendor would just love to see some return of investment
 >>on multicast, and as far as i am concerned this in the first place means
 >>to get ip packet replication in routers used and payed for. The control plane
 >>operations will just follow the users application demands, and SSM is just
 >>another alternative. If there were more interesting Internet-wide applications
 >>that can not work well with SSM, then certainly the focus would be different.

hey, dont get me wrongh - i LOVE ssm - its cool, its good, it scales,
it makes really good coffee etc - dont let me put you off - just
trying to say: don't throw out the work on PIM bidir just yet:-)
 

 cheers

   jon