Handley, M. and S. Hanna, "Multicast Address Allocation Protocol (AAP)", Work In Progress.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....certificate authority can possess a certificate issued by a globally trusted certificate authority. Multicast Address Allocation Architecture(MAAA) MAAA [24] specifies inter domain and intra domain address allocation methods . A well known instance of this architecture includes MASC [25] AAP [26], and MADCAP [27] Thus the owner of a multicast group is the host that is allocated that address by MADCAP. The group ownership service can be added to the MADCAP protocol. Or the MADCAP protocol can provide group owner certificates to the host that is allocated the address. Source Specific ....

M. Handley and S. Hanna, "Multicast address allocation protocol (AAP)," Internet Draft, IETF, June 2000, Work in progress.

.... (NAKs) or bitmaps instead of simple acknowledgements (ACKs) 13,39,16,44] ffl Explicit aggregation using aggregators or generic router assist, and reliable reverse NAK channels [31,44,13,9] ffl Statistical or round robin (scheduled) selection of receivers which would send control traffic [19,21]. ffl Scaling the feedback frequency based upon group size [40] 2) Optimization of the repair traffic and the bandwidth resources consumed by such traffic in various parts of the tree. The proposed approaches to this problem include: 2 ffl Use of local retransmittors (e.g. Designated Local ....

.... sender in the case of TFMCC [18,43] and the nominee based scheme [26] This approach is immediately applicable (and may be the only alternative) in cases where RMT feedback traffic does not exist (eg: 5 Digital Fountain [8] where RMT feedback is sparse and not reliable as congestion feedback [19,21], or where reverse RMT feedback terminates at intermediaries such as designated retransmittors [44] and may not reach the sender. For all other protocols which have NAK [13,16] ACK, Hierarchical ACK (HACK or TRACK) or bitmap [31,44,39] traffic which can be leveraged, a source based strategy ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

M. Handley, "Multicast address allocation protocol (AAP)," Internet Draft, Internet Engineering Task Force, Jun 1999. Work in progress.

....of address allocation: at the domain level, within a domain, and between hosts and the network. Work to develop protocols at each level is underway in the IETF. MASC would act as a top level address allocation protocol and operate between domains; the multicast Address Allocation Protocol (AAP)[27] would allocate addresses within a domain; and the Multicast Address Dynamic Client Allocation Protocol (MADCAP) 28] would be used by hosts to request addresses from a Multicast Address Allocation Server (MAAS) Glop Addressing. Another, much simpler, proposal is to statically allocate multicast ....

M. Handley, "Multicast address allocation protocol (AAP)", Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), draft-ietf-malloc-aap-*.txt, August 1998.

.... (NAKs) or bitmaps instead of simple acknowledgements (ACKs) 13, 38, 16, 43] ffl Explicit aggregation using aggregators or generic router assist, and reliable reverse NAK channels [31, 43, 13, 9] ffl Statistical or round robin (scheduled) selection of receivers which would send control traffic [19, 21]. ffl Scaling the feedback frequency based upon group size [39] 2. Optimization of the repair traffic and the bandwidth resources consumed by such traffic in various parts of the tree. The proposed approaches to this problem include: ffl Use of local retransmittors (e.g. Designated Local ....

....protocol vary widely across the different RMT alternatives. The receiver based CC approach is immediately applicable (and may be the only alternative) in cases where RMT feedback traffic does not exist (eg: Digital Fountain [8] where RMT feedback is sparse and not reliable as congestion feedback [19, 21], or where reverse RMT feedback terminates at intermediaries such as designated retransmittors [43] and may not reach the sender. Examples of the receiver based approach include TFMCC [18, 42] and the nomineebased scheme [26] For all other protocols which have NAK [13, 16] ACK, Hierarchical ACK ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

M. Handley, "Multicast address allocation protocol (AAP)," Internet Draft, Internet Engineering Task Force, Jun 1999. Work in progress.

....of address allocation: at the domain level, within a domain, and between hosts and the network. Work to develop protocols at each level is underway in the IETF. MASC would act as a top level address allocation protocol and operate between domains; the multicast Address Allocation Protocol (AAP)[28] would allocate addresses within a domain; and the Multicast Address Dynamic Client Allocation Protocol (MADCAP) 29] would be used by hosts to request addresses from a Multicast Address Allocation Server (MAAS) GLOP. Another, much simpler, proposal is to statically allocate multicast addresses ....

M. Handley, "Multicast address allocation protocol (AAP)." Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), draft-ietfmalloc -aap-*.txt, August 1998.

No context found.

Handley, M. and S. Hanna. "Multicast Address Allocation Protocol (AAP)", Work in Progress.

No context found.

Handley, M. and S. Hanna, "Multicast Address Allocation Protocol (AAP)", Work in Progress.

No context found.

Handley, M. and S. Hanna, "Multicast Address Allocation Protocol (AAP)", Work in Progress.

No context found.

Handley, M., "Multicast address allocation protocol (AAP)", Work in Progress.

....cases, the difference is not huge, but it argues in favor of densely allocating parts of the multicast address space before freeing up additional parts of the address space to be used. Such an address allocation mechanism is currently being proposed in the demand driven hierarchy of MASC[4] and AAP[19]. V. REMOVING THE INDEPENDENCE ASSUMPTION When successive values of a filter are independent, minimizing E[R] means minimizing p and q. However, minimization is limited by the constraint p q r = 1 (e.g. p q = 1 when r = 0) When the independence assumption is removed, this constraint ....

M. Handley, "Multicast address allocation protocol (AAP)," Internet Draft, June 1999, draft-ietf-malloc-aap- *.txt.

....cases, the difference is not huge, but it argues in favor of densely allocating parts of the multicast address space before freeing up additional parts of the address space to be used. Such an address allocation mechanism is currently being proposed in the demand driven hierarchy of MASC[4] and AAP[21]. V. REMOVING THE INDEPENDENCE ASSUMPTION When successive values of a filter are independent, minimizing E[R] means minimizing p and q. However, minimization is limited by the constraint p q r = 1 (e.g. p q = 1 when r = 0) When the independence assumption is removed, this constraint ....

M. Handley, "Multicast address allocation protocol (AAP)," Internet Draft, June 1999, draft-ietf-malloc-aap-*.txt.

No context found.

Handley, M. and S. Hanna, "Multicast Address Allocation Protocol (AAP)", Work In Progress.

No context found.

M. Handley and S. Hanna, "Multicast address allocation protocol (AAP)," Internet Draft, IETF, June 2000, Work in progress.

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC