From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from bifrost.lang.hm (mail.lang.hm [64.81.33.126]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0B41821F207 for ; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 08:41:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asgard.lang.hm (asgard.lang.hm [10.0.0.100]) by bifrost.lang.hm (8.13.4/8.13.4/Debian-3) with ESMTP id t29Feqhe007294; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 07:40:52 -0800 Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 08:40:52 -0700 (PDT) From: David Lang X-X-Sender: dlang@asgard.lang.hm To: Mikael Abrahamsson In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net Subject: Re: [Bloat] [Bulk] Re: Motivating commercial entities? tell the sales manager (fwd) X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2015 15:41:33 -0000 On Mon, 9 Mar 2015, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > They need to make sure multicast works much better than it does today. IPv6 > relies on it. why does IPv6 rely on multicast? multicast is never going to work that well on a busy wireless network, especially one that's encrypted with a different key to each station. If this is a fundamental requirement of IPv6, I see it more likely that it will mean the avoidance of IPv6 on wireless networks rather than an avoidance of wireless networks in order to use IPv6 David Lang