[BXXPwg] Agenda for 12/14 meeting

Gabe Wachob gwachob@wachob.com
Thu, 30 Nov 2000 20:50:24 -0500


Whats the point of multicast mapping? Isn't this confusing BXXP semantically? 

Doesn't BXXP rely on *a* peer talking to *a* peer? How can multiple peers 
responding to a multicast MSG message keep frame sequence numbers coordinated,
for example (I can think of several other issues).

Or am I not understanding what you are proposing?

	-Gabe

On Thu, Nov 30, 2000 at 05:15:01PM -0800, Dan Li wrote:
> Are people interested in a multicast Beep mapping? (I'm, for one). E.g., 
> run Beep on top of PGM or single source IP multicast. The application is 
> for disseminating notifications to multiple sites. It doesn't have to be 
> fully reliable but needs framing and sequencing.
> 
> At 04:58 PM 11/30/00 -0800, Keith McCloghrie wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >I need to submit this to the IETF secretariat tomorrow, so below is
> >the prelimiary version of the Agenda for San Diego.
> >
> >Gabe tells me that his notes won't be ready in time, and nobody else
> >has (yet) asked to speak, but we'll start with "Agenda bashing" to
> >accommodate late requests.
> >
> >
> >    BEEP WG, Thursday 14 December, 1530-1730
> >
> >    Agenda
> >
> >       1. Agenda bashing (5 minutes)
> >       2. WG status - Keith McCloghrie (5 minutes)
> >       3. Review of BEEP - Marshall Rose (45 minutes)
> >       4. Implementation Q&A - Marshall Rose (upto 65 minutes)
> >
> >Keith.
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >BXXPwg mailing list
> >BXXPwg@lists.invisible.net
> >http://lists.invisible.net/mailman/listinfo/bxxpwg
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> BXXPwg mailing list
> BXXPwg@lists.invisible.net
> http://lists.invisible.net/mailman/listinfo/bxxpwg