On Sat, 20 Nov 2021 at 22:14, Måns Nilsson <mansaxel@besserwisser.org> wrote:
Subject: Re: Class D addresses? was: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Date: Sat, Nov 20, 2021 at 11:51:24AM -0800 Quoting William Herrin ( bill@herrin.us): All the heavy lifting in video production via IP is done over multicast. Mostly, it is internal to one organisation, and the 239/8 (RFC2365) block is being used, but routing multi-gbit RTP flows over multicast is a thing where I work.
239/8 can essentially be looked at as RFC1918 space for multicast. Possibly time to consider using SSM and the 232/8 block? I hear they have multicast in IPv6 now. \s Anyway, AFAICT the 224/4 proposal is actually the 225/8-231/8 proposal, leaving 224/8 out from that block of otherwise 224/5 (as 232/8-239/8 are not covered in the proposal). M