Re: Canceling Wednesday's meeting

Hi Jake,

Nothing is ever simple!

I'll have a go with 1 and 2 and have a think about 4 and 5.

Regarding 2, I've been working on an evening project
https://github.com/SentryPeer/SentryPeer (written in C) and exploring
multicast for it. I'll see what libmcrx needs Windows wise and do what I
can. I've also got the project an IPv6 multicast allocation -
https://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv6-multicast-addresses/ipv6-multicast-addresses.xhtml
I'll see what I can do with it here too and regarding item 4. on AS199659.

Hopefully get to item 5 at some point.

Thanks,
Gavin.


On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 at 20:49, Holland, Jake <jholland@akamai.com> wrote:

> Hi Gavin,
>
>
>
> Great question, and I wish I had a simple and straightforward answer.
>
>
>
> I think there’s several useful directions, and contributions toward any of
> them would be welcome. Off the top of my head, these stand out to me:
>
>
>
>    1. Ease of use/getting started primers:
>    We’ve got the one Chris and I worked on at
>    https://github.com/w3c/multicast-cg/blob/main/primers/01-getting-started.md
>    Walking thru that, making sure it works, adding useful diagrams or
>    making it easier to read or follow, would be a good starting place.
>    2. Adding Windows support to https://github.com/GrumpyOldTroll/libmcrx
>    would be helpful
>    3. A web app that would make a useful demo would be good.  I think the
>    right next step on this front would be to have something using webtransport
>    datagrams that would benefit from multicast.  If I were starting this
>    today, I’d try to wrap udp video from vlc into wt datagrams on server, and
>    get a page running that could play them.  But I worry this will be harder
>    than it sounds.  (Other options might include trying to get mad-flute or
>    norm or uftp running the same kind of way, for downloads.)
>    4. Standing up networks that send and/or receive multicast outside.
>    Internet2 and GEANT both have some capability on these, plus I’ve got some
>    traffic sources with AMT reachability, but more interconnections here
>    (especially if there’s useful traffic) would be cool.
>    5. There’s no reason it has to be me writing up the quic extension
>    idea... If you want to take a crack at it I can review or co-author in a 2
>    nd revision or whatever.
>
>
>
> Any of those sound compelling?  There’s probably other useful things too,
> I doubt I got everything important here, just a few of the ones that jumped
> out at me.
>
>
>
> -Jake
>
>
>