Re: Why MSDP?

[John Meylor <jmeylor@cisco.com>]

Toerless Eckert wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 05:04:56PM -0800, Dino Farinacci wrote:
> >     But I'm in favor of keeping acroynms as simple as possible, so I would
> >     suggest:
> >
> >       SSM - single source multicast (because changing this will really
> >                                        confuse people - again)
> 
> Well, i thought we'd already called this "Source Specific Multicast" for quite
> a while. At least in all the specs in the SSM working group.

right, it treats sources specifically, rather than all sources
generally, but can  address several sources specifically
so it isn't really limited to a "single source".
Dino, I think this would resolve your point, correct?

And based on this conclusion from last year,
all the SSM related drafts use Source Specific in
the expansion, so
SSM = Source Specific Multicast would require the
least (zero) change.

> And if you have that meaning of SSM, then ASM makes a very good distinction:
> In SSM you the receiver must be SPECIFIC about which source you want traffic
> from (and right, it can be more than one), and in ASM you take traffic from
> ANY source.

agree, ASM seems fine to me.

 John


 John