From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Tue Feb 1 09:27:41 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA18700 for ; Tue, 1 Feb 2000 09:27:39 -0500 (EST) Received: by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id GAA23150 for pim-list; Tue, 1 Feb 2000 06:19:34 -0800 (PST) X-Authentication-Warning: catarina.usc.edu: majordomo set sender to owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu using -f Received: from shuttle.wide.toshiba.co.jp (shuttle.wide.toshiba.co.jp [202.249.10.124]) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id GAA23146 for ; Tue, 1 Feb 2000 06:19:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (shuttle.sixyards.wide.toshiba.co.jp [3ffe:501:100f:0:200:f8ff:fe01:61cf]) by shuttle.wide.toshiba.co.jp (8.9.1+3.1W/8.9.1) with ESMTP id XAA04811; Tue, 1 Feb 2000 23:07:54 +0900 (JST) Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2000 23:18:31 +0900 Message-ID: From: JINMEI Tatuya / =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCP0BMQEMjOkgbKEI=?= To: Francis.Dupont@inria.fr Cc: haberman@nortelnetworks.com, pim@catarina.usc.edu, ipng@sunroof.eng.sun.com Subject: Re: updated PIM for IPv6 draft In-Reply-To: In your message of "Thu, 27 Jan 2000 23:21:15 +0100" <200001272221.XAA02816@givry.inria.fr> References: <200001272221.XAA02816@givry.inria.fr> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.2.15 (More Than Words) Emacs/20.5 Mule/4.0 (HANANOEN) Organization: Research & Development Center, Toshiba Corp., Kawasaki, Japan. MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.13.7 - "Awazu") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Dispatcher: imput version 980905(IM100) Lines: 26 Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk >>>>> On Thu, 27 Jan 2000 23:21:15 +0100, >>>>> Francis Dupont said: > In your previous mail you wrote: > Does this mean that everyone agrees on the change? > => I agree (ie. the rationate for ICMPv6 checksum applies to PIMv6 one). > Regards > Francis.Dupont@inria.fr > PS: we need a way (flag day?) to solve the interopability issue > introduced by this change. Something might be necessary, but I'm not sure how the interoperability issues are serious. I think there've not been so many implementations of IPv6 PIM yet (unfortunately). Maybe we'll be able to make the status clear in forthcoming interop tests (e.g. connectathon, IPv6 Forum Summit, etc). JINMEI, Tatuya Communication Platform Lab. Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp. jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Fri Feb 4 18:19:14 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA12549 for ; Fri, 4 Feb 2000 18:19:12 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA10275 for pim-list; Fri, 4 Feb 2000 15:00:20 -0800 (PST) X-Authentication-Warning: catarina.usc.edu: majordomo set sender to owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu using -f Received: from sol.extremenetworks.com (sol.extremenetworks.com [216.52.8.2]) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA10270 for ; Fri, 4 Feb 2000 15:00:15 -0800 (PST) Received: by SOL with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Fri, 4 Feb 2000 14:59:10 -0800 Message-ID: <808F64DDB492D3119D3C00508B5D8D7353A258@SOL> From: Desikan Saravanan To: "'pim_ml'" Subject: Sparse mode Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2000 14:59:04 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Hi I have a question about the SM behavior. Conside the following topology. Sender | Receiver --- A -------- B -------- C -------- RP | | ------------------------------------ At first A sends (*,g) join to RP and RP sends decapsulated packets to A. RP first decides to join SPT and sends join upstream. So C has only an (s,g) entry. After sometime, A decides to join SPT and does. Since A joins SPT, A then sends (s,g) rpt prune to RP. so, RP prunes the interface towards A from its (s,g) entry. so, its (s,g) has no outgoing interfaces and it now sends (s,g) prune upstream. C has now an (s, g) entry with one interface in pruned list and no interface in outgoing interface list. As no data packets come from B to C because of (s, g) prune, C's (s,g) entry timer will not refreshed by anything and eventually goes off. I was wondering is it a correct behaviour for C? If so, how come a new member joins from another interface to C gets the data packets? ie. Sender new member | | Receiver --- A -------- B -------- C -------- RP | | ------------------------------------ I would appreciate your help in understanding the protocol behaviour. Thanks Des From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Fri Feb 4 19:13:52 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA13142 for ; Fri, 4 Feb 2000 19:13:49 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA10550 for pim-list; Fri, 4 Feb 2000 16:01:28 -0800 (PST) X-Authentication-Warning: catarina.usc.edu: majordomo set sender to owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu using -f Received: from ntserver1.redstonecom.com (ntserver1.redstonecom.com [199.105.223.130] (may be forged)) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA10546 for ; Fri, 4 Feb 2000 16:01:20 -0800 (PST) Received: by NTSERVER1 with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1461.28) id ; Fri, 4 Feb 2000 19:00:54 -0500 Message-ID: <90ABC30C744ED311B16E00500464BEFC4F565C@NTSERVER1> From: "Shekhar, Ravi" To: Desikan Saravanan , "'pim_ml'" Subject: RE: Sparse mode Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2000 19:00:53 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1461.28) Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----_=_NextPart_000_01BF6F6C.12003890" Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_000_01BF6F6C.12003890 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Hi Des, Assuming [after reading the complete mail], that you meant new member to be only connected to C and similarly the sender to be connected only to B (tabs make them look as if they are attached to two routers)... New member at C will cause C to send <*, G> join to RP. This will result in RP adding oif to both its <*, G> and . In this case it so happens that the oif for is same as its iif. But RP should still generate SG-SPT joins for it. This scenario of having iif same as oif (and no other oif) is not covered in the spec and has been raised earlier (see attachment). Hope that helps. - Ravi Shekhar. > Hi > > I have a question about the SM behavior. > > Conside the following topology. > > Sender > | > Receiver --- A -------- B -------- C -------- RP > | | > ------------------------------------ > > At first A sends (*,g) join to RP and RP sends decapsulated > packets to A. > RP first decides to join SPT and sends join upstream. > So C has only an (s,g) entry. > > After sometime, A decides to join SPT and does. > Since A joins SPT, A then sends (s,g) rpt prune to RP. > so, RP prunes the interface towards A from its (s,g) entry. > so, its (s,g) has no outgoing interfaces and it now sends (s,g) prune > upstream. > > C has now an (s, g) entry with one interface in pruned list > and no interface > in outgoing interface list. > As no data packets come from B to C because of (s, g) prune, > C's (s,g) entry timer will not refreshed by anything and > eventually goes > off. > > I was wondering is it a correct behaviour for C? > If so, how come a new member joins from another interface to > C gets the data > packets? > ie. > Sender new member > | | > Receiver --- A -------- B -------- C -------- RP > | | > ------------------------------------ > > I would appreciate your help in understanding the protocol behaviour. > > Thanks > Des > ------_=_NextPart_000_01BF6F6C.12003890 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Description: RE: PIM Working Group last call for draft-ietf-pim-v2-sm-01.txt From: "Shekhar, Ravi" To: lwei@siara.com, pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: RE: PIM Working Group last call for draft-ietf-pim-v2-sm-01.txt Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 11:36:01 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1461.28) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Liming, I am still curious to know how the following scenario is covered by the draft. Regards. - Ravi Shekhar. > > I was considering the following scenario: > > > > <*,G>-> > > r---R1----R2------|I > > |----RP > > s---R3---R4-------| > > <- ??? > > > > > > r is the recvr, s is the sender. > > RP decides to switch to shortest path. > > Will R4 be able to detect and switch to SPT without > > RP sending a join to it? > > No. The RP has to decide if it needs to switch to the SPT. In that case, RP here has an entry with iif as I and oif list as "null" (only oif I is also iif so its not included in the list). It will _not_ generate join as per section 3.2.1 Sending Join/Prune Messages Periodic Join/Prune Messages: point 2.3 "3 The oif list in the (S,G) entry is not null." which requires it to be "not null". Is it covered somewhere else/in some other form in the draft? Thanks. - Ravi Shekhar. > > Folks, > > This is a PIM Working Group last call for the PIM sparse mode draft, > submitted as . This last call expires > by Jan 1 2000. Please post comments on this mailing list. > > Thanks, > -Liming Wei & Tom Pusateri > ------_=_NextPart_000_01BF6F6C.12003890-- From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Fri Feb 4 19:15:49 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA13161 for ; Fri, 4 Feb 2000 19:15:46 -0500 (EST) Received: by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA10579 for pim-list; Fri, 4 Feb 2000 16:08:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from kickme.cisco.com (kickme.cisco.com [198.92.30.42]) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA10575 for ; Fri, 4 Feb 2000 16:08:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from kouvelas-u10.cisco.com (kouvelas-u10.cisco.com [171.69.65.54]) by kickme.cisco.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA26639; Fri, 4 Feb 2000 15:58:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (kouvelas@localhost) by kouvelas-u10.cisco.com (8.8.8-Cisco List Logging/CISCO.WS.1.2) with ESMTP id QAA01076; Fri, 4 Feb 2000 16:07:06 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200002050007.QAA01076@kouvelas-u10.cisco.com> X-Authentication-Warning: kouvelas-u10.cisco.com: kouvelas owned process doing -bs To: Desikan Saravanan cc: "'pim_ml'" Subject: Re: Sparse mode In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 04 Feb 2000 14:59:04 PST." <808F64DDB492D3119D3C00508B5D8D7353A258@SOL> Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2000 16:07:06 -0800 From: Isidor Kouvelas Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Desikan, The current version of the PIM spec does not describe the turnaround rules which are necessary to make RP-on-a-stick scenarios (like the one you describe) work. For a list of problems with the current spec please look at http://www.aciri.org/fenner/mcast/pim/sm/issues.html thanks Isidor Desikan Saravanan writes: >Hi > >I have a question about the SM behavior. > >Conside the following topology. > > Sender > | >Receiver --- A -------- B -------- C -------- RP > | | > ------------------------------------ > >At first A sends (*,g) join to RP and RP sends decapsulated packets to A. >RP first decides to join SPT and sends join upstream. >So C has only an (s,g) entry. > >After sometime, A decides to join SPT and does. >Since A joins SPT, A then sends (s,g) rpt prune to RP. >so, RP prunes the interface towards A from its (s,g) entry. >so, its (s,g) has no outgoing interfaces and it now sends (s,g) prune >upstream. > >C has now an (s, g) entry with one interface in pruned list and no interface >in outgoing interface list. >As no data packets come from B to C because of (s, g) prune, >C's (s,g) entry timer will not refreshed by anything and eventually goes >off. > >I was wondering is it a correct behaviour for C? >If so, how come a new member joins from another interface to C gets the data >packets? >ie. > Sender new member > | | >Receiver --- A -------- B -------- C -------- RP > | | > ------------------------------------ > >I would appreciate your help in understanding the protocol behaviour. > >Thanks >Des > > From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Tue Feb 8 21:52:03 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA16117 for ; Tue, 8 Feb 2000 21:52:03 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA27297 for pim-list; Tue, 8 Feb 2000 18:41:32 -0800 (PST) X-Authentication-Warning: catarina.usc.edu: majordomo set sender to owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu using -f Received: from sol.extremenetworks.com (sol.extremenetworks.com [216.52.8.2]) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA27293 for ; Tue, 8 Feb 2000 18:41:28 -0800 (PST) Received: by SOL with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id <1S1MBADZ>; Tue, 8 Feb 2000 18:40:22 -0800 Message-ID: <808F64DDB492D3119D3C00508B5D8D7353A26E@SOL> From: Desikan Saravanan To: "'pim_ml'" Subject: CRP priorities Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2000 18:40:17 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk As per the RFC, 3.6.1 Sending Candidate-RP-Advertisements C-RPs periodically unicast C-RP-Advs to the BSR for that domain. The interval for sending these messages is subject to local configuration at the C-RP. Candidate-RP-Advertisements carry group address and group mask fields. This enables the advertising router to limit the advertisement to certain prefixes or scopes of groups. The advertising router may enforce this scope acceptance when receiving Registers or Join/Prune messages. C-RPs should send C-RP-Adv messages with the `Priority' field set to `0'. Can anyone shed some light on the reason for forcing the CRP advertisements to have the priority field set to '0'? Thanks Des From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Wed Feb 9 00:13:35 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA18702 for ; Wed, 9 Feb 2000 00:13:34 -0500 (EST) Received: by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id VAA28026 for pim-list; Tue, 8 Feb 2000 21:01:17 -0800 (PST) X-Authentication-Warning: catarina.usc.edu: majordomo set sender to owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu using -f Received: from ficon-tech.com ([12.10.198.190]) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA28021 for ; Tue, 8 Feb 2000 21:01:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from ficon-tech.com (renu.india.ficon-tech.com [172.25.1.111] (may be forged)) by ficon-tech.com (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA21680; Wed, 9 Feb 2000 10:24:07 +0530 (IST) (envelope-from ragarwal@ficon-tech.com) Message-ID: <38A0F3DB.F50DA477@ficon-tech.com> Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2000 10:28:03 +0530 From: Renu Agarwal Organization: Ficon Technology India Pvt Ltd., X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Desikan Saravanan CC: "'pim_ml'" Subject: Re: CRP priorities References: <808F64DDB492D3119D3C00508B5D8D7353A26E@SOL> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Desikan, This is done to prevent the BSR from ignoring the Candidate RP advertisement information.If the priority is 0 then BSR shall not ignore the prefix indicated in the C-RP Advt. information. See section 3.6.2 which says that .. The BSR may apply a local policy to limit the number of Candidate RPs included in the Bootstrap message. The BSR may override the prefix indicated in a C-RP-Adv unless the `Priority' field is not zero. Hope it clarifies, Regards, Renu Desikan Saravanan wrote: > > As per the RFC, > > 3.6.1 Sending Candidate-RP-Advertisements > > C-RPs periodically unicast C-RP-Advs to the BSR for that domain. The > interval for sending these messages is subject to local configuration > at the C-RP. > > Candidate-RP-Advertisements carry group address and group mask > fields. This enables the advertising router to limit the > advertisement to certain prefixes or scopes of groups. The > advertising router may enforce this scope acceptance when receiving > Registers or Join/Prune messages. C-RPs should send C-RP-Adv > messages with the `Priority' field set to `0'. > > Can anyone shed some light on the reason for forcing the CRP advertisements > to have the priority field set to '0'? > > Thanks > Des From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Wed Feb 9 00:49:46 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA19155 for ; Wed, 9 Feb 2000 00:49:45 -0500 (EST) Received: by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id VAA28386 for pim-list; Tue, 8 Feb 2000 21:42:18 -0800 (PST) X-Authentication-Warning: catarina.usc.edu: majordomo set sender to owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu using -f Received: from mailhost.iprg.nokia.com (mailhost.iprg.nokia.com [205.226.5.12]) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA28382 for ; Tue, 8 Feb 2000 21:42:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from agni.iprg.nokia.com (agni.iprg.nokia.com [205.226.8.100]) by mailhost.iprg.nokia.com (8.8.8/8.6.10) with ESMTP id VAA25911; Tue, 8 Feb 2000 21:41:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from agni.iprg.nokia.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by agni.iprg.nokia.com (8.8.8/8.6.12) with ESMTP id VAA16989; Tue, 8 Feb 2000 21:41:38 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200002090541.VAA16989@agni.iprg.nokia.com> To: pim@catarina.usc.edu Cc: Desikan Saravanan Subject: Re: CRP priorities In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 08 Feb 2000 18:40:17 PST." <808F64DDB492D3119D3C00508B5D8D7353A26E@SOL> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <16986.950074897.1@agni.iprg.nokia.com> Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2000 21:41:38 -0800 From: Ravi Puvvala Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk The spec should read that "the default priority of CRP advertisement messages should be zero". Later in Section 3.6.2 2 The BSR adds the RP address to its local pool of candidate RPs, according to the associated group prefix(es) in the C-RP- Adv message. The Holdtime in the C-RP-Adv message is also stored with the corresponding RP, to be included later in the Bootstrap message. The BSR may apply a local policy to limit the number of Candidate RPs included in the Bootstrap message. The BSR may override the prefix indicated in a C-RP-Adv unless the `Priority' field is not zero. The last line indicates that the priority field *can* be set to something other than zero. Ravi Desikan Saravanan writes: | As per the RFC, | | | 3.6.1 Sending Candidate-RP-Advertisements | | C-RPs periodically unicast C-RP-Advs to the BSR for that domain. The | interval for sending these messages is subject to local configuration | at the C-RP. | | Candidate-RP-Advertisements carry group address and group mask | fields. This enables the advertising router to limit the | advertisement to certain prefixes or scopes of groups. The | advertising router may enforce this scope acceptance when receiving | Registers or Join/Prune messages. C-RPs should send C-RP-Adv | messages with the `Priority' field set to `0'. | | | Can anyone shed some light on the reason for forcing the CRP advertisements | to have the priority field set to '0'? | | Thanks | Des From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Mon Feb 14 03:47:51 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA02168 for ; Mon, 14 Feb 2000 03:47:50 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id AAA94012 for pim-list; Mon, 14 Feb 2000 00:43:19 -0800 (PST) X-Authentication-Warning: catarina.usc.edu: majordom set sender to owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu using -f Received: from ficon-tech.com ([12.10.198.190]) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA93996 for ; Mon, 14 Feb 2000 00:39:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from ficon-tech.com (capricorn.india.ficon-tech.com [172.25.2.101]) by ficon-tech.com (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA65768; Mon, 14 Feb 2000 14:02:21 +0530 (IST) (envelope-from sjain@ficon-tech.com) Message-ID: <38A7BF38.C226324F@ficon-tech.com> Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 14:09:20 +0530 From: Shishir Jain Organization: Ficon Technology X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.5.1 i86pc) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Comay CC: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Is Solaris 2.8 kernel PIM capable? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello David, We just got Solaris 2.8 Early Access for Sparc. At first look at the header file ip_mroute.h, it seems no new changes have been done to support PIM. Is there a separate patch for PIM for Solaris 2.8 or is it planned to be released later? Please do let me know its current status of availability. Thanks & Regards Shishir David Comay wrote: > > Solaris 2.6 and its kernel are not currently able to support PIM. > However, Solaris 8 will have kernel support and you should be able to > run the standalone daemons referenced off > > http://catarina.usc.edu/pim/ > > under Solaris 8 which is available via early access from > > http://www.sun.com/developers/tools/solaris/ > > Cheers, > > dsc > > > > On Fri, 19 Nov 1999, Shishir Jain wrote: > > > > > Hello! > > > > We are looking at implementing PIM-SM protocol on Solaris 2.6 sparc. > > > > The question I have is: > > > > Is Solaris 2.6 kernel completely capable to support PIM and has all the > > required interfaces? I was looking at pimd implementation publicly > > available and found few differences in netinet/ip_mroute.h and here are > > few differences like: > > > > - VIFF_REGISTER flag for vif structure is not defined on Solaris 2.6 > > - IGMPMSG_WHOLEPKT is not defined on Solaris 2.6 > > > > Can these things be accomplished other ways, or, some patches are > > available for PIM support somewhere for Solaris 2.6? > > > > Thanks in advance for the help. > > > > Regards, > > > > Shishir > > -- > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Shishir Jain > > Ficon Technology > > E-mail: mailto:sjain@ficon-tech.com > > Web: http://www.ficon-tech.com > > -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Shishir Jain Ficon Technology E-mail: mailto:sjain@ficon-tech.com Web: http://www.ficon-tech.com From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Mon Feb 14 06:10:14 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA03032 for ; Mon, 14 Feb 2000 06:10:13 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id DAA94888 for pim-list; Mon, 14 Feb 2000 03:05:33 -0800 (PST) X-Authentication-Warning: catarina.usc.edu: majordom set sender to owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu using -f Received: from jhep.sissa.it (jhep.sissa.it [147.122.2.48]) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id DAA94883 for ; Mon, 14 Feb 2000 03:05:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from garamond.sissa.it (garamond [147.122.2.46]) by jhep.sissa.it (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id LAA10341 for ; Mon, 14 Feb 2000 11:58:13 +0100 (MET) Received: from localhost by garamond.sissa.it (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id LAA00577; Mon, 14 Feb 2000 11:58:13 +0100 Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 11:58:13 +0100 (MET) From: Fabrizio Nesti X-Sender: nesti@garamond Reply-To: nesti@jhep.sissa.it To: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Pimd on Linux 2.2.x Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Hello, I am interested in running pimd on a linux workstation (2.2.12), with only one ethernet interface. (our router is not ready yet). Is it true that PIM should also support tunnel interfaces, and if pimd does, how can it recognise things like tunl0 or dvmrp1? Thanks in advance ciao, Fabrizio Nesti -- SISSA From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Mon Feb 14 11:27:01 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA16147 for ; Mon, 14 Feb 2000 11:26:59 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id IAA96128 for pim-list; Mon, 14 Feb 2000 08:21:24 -0800 (PST) X-Authentication-Warning: catarina.usc.edu: majordom set sender to owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu using -f Received: from lukla.Sun.COM (lukla.Sun.COM [192.18.98.31]) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA96123 for ; Mon, 14 Feb 2000 08:21:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from sunmail1.Sun.COM ([129.145.1.2]) by lukla.Sun.COM (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA17357; Mon, 14 Feb 2000 09:21:16 -0700 (MST) Received: from jurassic.eng.sun.com (jurassic.Eng.Sun.COM [129.146.83.130]) by sunmail1.Sun.COM (8.9.1b+Sun/8.9.1/ENSMAIL,v1.6.1-sunmail1) with ESMTP id IAA07774; Mon, 14 Feb 2000 08:21:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from shanu (dsl196-80.Eng.Sun.COM [129.146.196.80]) by jurassic.eng.sun.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with SMTP id IAA12851; Mon, 14 Feb 2000 08:21:14 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 08:22:11 -0800 (PST) From: "sangeeta.mukherjee" Reply-To: "sangeeta.mukherjee" Subject: Re: Is Solaris 2.8 kernel PIM capable? To: Shishir Jain Cc: comay@jurassic.Eng.Sun.COM, pim@catarina.usc.edu In-Reply-To: "Your message with ID" <38A7BF38.C226324F@ficon-tech.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Solaris 8 FCS is PIM capable. THe necessary defines are in netinet/pim.h However Solaris 8 FCS does not include the PIM daemon. Please obtain it from ISI' PIM website. Sangeeta > > Hello David, > > We just got Solaris 2.8 Early Access for Sparc. At first look at the > header file ip_mroute.h, it seems no new changes have been done to > support PIM. > > Is there a separate patch for PIM for Solaris 2.8 or is it planned to be > released later? Please do let me know its current status of > availability. > > Thanks & Regards > > Shishir > > David Comay wrote: > > > > Solaris 2.6 and its kernel are not currently able to support PIM. > > However, Solaris 8 will have kernel support and you should be able to > > run the standalone daemons referenced off > > > > http://catarina.usc.edu/pim/ > > > > under Solaris 8 which is available via early access from > > > > http://www.sun.com/developers/tools/solaris/ > > > > Cheers, > > > > dsc > > > > > > > > On Fri, 19 Nov 1999, Shishir Jain wrote: > > > > > > > > Hello! > > > > > > We are looking at implementing PIM-SM protocol on Solaris 2.6 sparc. > > > > > > The question I have is: > > > > > > Is Solaris 2.6 kernel completely capable to support PIM and has all the > > > required interfaces? I was looking at pimd implementation publicly > > > available and found few differences in netinet/ip_mroute.h and here are > > > few differences like: > > > > > > - VIFF_REGISTER flag for vif structure is not defined on Solaris 2.6 > > > - IGMPMSG_WHOLEPKT is not defined on Solaris 2.6 > > > > > > Can these things be accomplished other ways, or, some patches are > > > available for PIM support somewhere for Solaris 2.6? > > > > > > Thanks in advance for the help. > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Shishir > > > -- > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Shishir Jain > > > Ficon Technology > > > E-mail: mailto:sjain@ficon-tech.com > > > Web: http://www.ficon-tech.com > > > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Shishir Jain > Ficon Technology > E-mail: mailto:sjain@ficon-tech.com > Web: http://www.ficon-tech.com From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Mon Feb 14 13:30:18 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA20275 for ; Mon, 14 Feb 2000 13:30:15 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id AAA93829 for pim-list; Mon, 14 Feb 2000 00:01:47 -0800 (PST) X-Authentication-Warning: catarina.usc.edu: majordom set sender to owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu using -f Received: from ficon-tech.com ([12.10.198.190]) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA93820 for ; Mon, 14 Feb 2000 00:01:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from ficon-tech.com (capricorn.india.ficon-tech.com [172.25.2.101]) by ficon-tech.com (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA63962; Mon, 14 Feb 2000 13:25:32 +0530 (IST) (envelope-from sjain@ficon-tech.com) Message-ID: <38A7B698.CC33C4A1@ficon-tech.com> Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 13:32:32 +0530 From: Shishir Jain Organization: Ficon Technology X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.5.1 i86pc) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Comay CC: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Re: Is Solaris 2.6 kernel PIM capable? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello David, We just got Solaris 2.8 Early Access for Sparc. At first look at the header file ip_mroute.h, it seems no new changes have been done to support PIM. Is there a separate patch for PIM for Solaris 2.8 or is it planned to be released later? Please do let me know its current status of availability. Thanks & Regards Shishir David Comay wrote: > > Solaris 2.6 and its kernel are not currently able to support PIM. > However, Solaris 8 will have kernel support and you should be able to > run the standalone daemons referenced off > > http://catarina.usc.edu/pim/ > > under Solaris 8 which is available via early access from > > http://www.sun.com/developers/tools/solaris/ > > Cheers, > > dsc > > > > On Fri, 19 Nov 1999, Shishir Jain wrote: > > > > > Hello! > > > > We are looking at implementing PIM-SM protocol on Solaris 2.6 sparc. > > > > The question I have is: > > > > Is Solaris 2.6 kernel completely capable to support PIM and has all the > > required interfaces? I was looking at pimd implementation publicly > > available and found few differences in netinet/ip_mroute.h and here are > > few differences like: > > > > - VIFF_REGISTER flag for vif structure is not defined on Solaris 2.6 > > - IGMPMSG_WHOLEPKT is not defined on Solaris 2.6 > > > > Can these things be accomplished other ways, or, some patches are > > available for PIM support somewhere for Solaris 2.6? > > > > Thanks in advance for the help. > > > > Regards, > > > > Shishir > > -- > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Shishir Jain > > Ficon Technology > > E-mail: mailto:sjain@ficon-tech.com > > Web: http://www.ficon-tech.com > > -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Shishir Jain Ficon Technology E-mail: mailto:sjain@ficon-tech.com Web: http://www.ficon-tech.com From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Tue Feb 15 22:05:30 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA02380 for ; Tue, 15 Feb 2000 22:05:28 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA10659 for pim-list; Tue, 15 Feb 2000 18:57:10 -0800 (PST) X-Authentication-Warning: catarina.usc.edu: majordom set sender to owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu using -f Received: from rumi.usc.edu (rumi.usc.edu [128.125.51.41]) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA10654; Tue, 15 Feb 2000 18:56:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from rumi (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rumi.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA26434; Tue, 15 Feb 2000 18:56:22 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200002160256.SAA26434@rumi.usc.edu> To: nesti@jhep.sissa.it cc: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Re: Pimd on Linux 2.2.x In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 14 Feb 2000 11:58:13 +0100." Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 18:56:22 -0800 From: Pavlin Ivanov Radoslavov Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk > Hello, > I am interested in running pimd on a linux workstation (2.2.12), with only > one ethernet interface. (our router is not ready yet). > > Is it true that PIM should also support tunnel interfaces, and if pimd does, > how can it recognise things like tunl0 or dvmrp1? It doesn't. If those interfaces were setup in the kernel before pimd was launched, it will try to use them as long as those interfaces have the IFF_MULTICAST flag set. To be more specific, it will not ignore those interfaces, but to be really able to use them for things like sending Join messages, the unicast routing must use those interfaces as the incoming interface toward some destinations. If your kernel doesn't incorporate the tunl0(==GRE?) interface in the routing table, then they cannot be used (sorry, I don't know the facts about the Linux's kernel). The tunnel interfaces are not part of the PIM spec. In general, you can use those interfaces as long as the kernel "hides" their non-physical origin. Regards, Pavlin From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Fri Feb 18 11:06:05 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA25860 for ; Fri, 18 Feb 2000 11:06:02 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id HAA44054 for pim-list; Fri, 18 Feb 2000 07:59:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (gill.sissa.it [147.122.2.51]) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id HAA44048; Fri, 18 Feb 2000 07:59:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (nesti@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA03332; Fri, 18 Feb 2000 17:54:57 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: localhost.localdomain: nesti owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2000 17:54:56 +0100 (MET) From: Fabrizio Nesti X-Sender: nesti@localhost.localdomain Reply-To: nesti@jhep.sissa.it To: pim@catarina.usc.edu cc: Pavlin Ivanov Radoslavov Subject: Re: Pimd on Linux 2.2.x In-Reply-To: <200002160256.SAA26434@rumi.usc.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Thanks for the reply! > > Is it true that PIM should also support tunnel interfaces, and if pimd does, > > how can it recognise things like tunl0 or dvmrp1? > > It doesn't. If those interfaces were setup in the kernel before pimd > was launched, it will try to use them as long as those interfaces > have the IFF_MULTICAST flag set. Actually tt seems that they are not recognized, at startup: pimd: 17:43:35.986 warning - Invalid phyint address 'dvmrp1' in /etc/pimd.conf The interface is up and running, although not in the unicast routing table. So, if I understand, pimd is not making any kernel level routing, just handling joins etc. on multicast group, and it needs an entry in the routing table? > To be more specific, it will not ignore those interfaces, but to be > really able to use them for things like sending Join messages, the > unicast routing must use those interfaces as the incoming interface > toward some destinations. If your kernel doesn't incorporate the > tunl0(==GRE?) interface in the routing table, then they cannot be used > (sorry, I don't know the facts about the Linux's kernel). On the other hand, looking at the code in vif.c, it seems that tunnel interfaces may be recognized by means of the flag 't': /* * Initialize the passed vif with all appropriate default values. * "t" is true if a tunnel or register_vif, or false if a phyint. */ void zero_vif(v, t) ... but actually it is called in config.c only, with FALSE parameter: v = &uvifs[numvifs]; zero_vif(v, FALSE); ... I would like just to manage a multicast (only, no TCP etc) tunnel through a non compliant router.. Is it possible? Again thanks Fabrizio Nesti -- SISSA From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Sun Feb 20 22:40:34 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA16783 for ; Sun, 20 Feb 2000 22:40:33 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA02053 for pim-list; Sun, 20 Feb 2000 19:29:37 -0800 (PST) X-Authentication-Warning: catarina.usc.edu: majordom set sender to owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu using -f Received: from cindy.yamato.ibm.co.jp (cindy.yamato.ibm.co.jp [203.141.89.10]) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA02048 for ; Sun, 20 Feb 2000 19:29:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from kyoto.yamato.ibm.com (kyoto3.yamato.ibm.com [9.68.3.1]) by cindy.yamato.ibm.co.jp (8.8.8/3.7W/GW3.3) with ESMTP id MAA80998; Mon, 21 Feb 2000 12:29:18 +0900 Received: from localhost (ymtlogin1.yamato.ibm.com [9.68.80.207]) by kyoto.yamato.ibm.com (8.8.8/MS2.00) with ESMTP id MAA24616; Mon, 21 Feb 2000 12:29:12 +0900 To: nesti@jhep.sissa.it Cc: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Re: Pimd on Linux 2.2.x In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 18 Feb 2000 17:54:56 +0100 (MET)" References: X-Mailer: Mew version 1.93 on Emacs 19.28 / Mule 2.3 (SUETSUMUHANA) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20000221122912B.asaeda@yamato.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 12:29:12 +0900 (JST) From: Hitoshi Asaeda X-Dispatcher: imput version 980905(IM100) Lines: 35 Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Actually tt seems that they are not recognized, at startup: > > pimd: 17:43:35.986 warning - Invalid phyint address 'dvmrp1' > in /etc/pimd.conf I believe you specified a statment, "phyint dvmrp1", in pimd.conf. This means that you pointed out to disable the interface. However, according to above warning, pimd complained that dvmrp1 was not recognized as an interface because of some reason, like no IP address, no IFF_MULTICAST, etc. So pimd just ignored this statement, "phyint dvmrp". Anyway, what is "dvmrp1"? I've not used Linux, but "dvmrp1" looks to me curious. This provides some tunnel mechanism? > The interface is up and running, although not in the unicast routing table. > So, if I understand, pimd is not making any kernel level routing, > just handling joins etc. on multicast group, and it needs an entry in the > routing table? To construct a multicast routing tree, unicast routing table is required. And pimd itself doesn't forward packets. Kernel does. > I would like just to manage a multicast (only, no TCP etc) tunnel through > a non compliant router.. > Is it possible? pimd doesn't have a tunnel mechanism, like mrouted. However, if you have tunnel interfaces, like gif0, gre0, etc, it'll be able to use them with pimd. But, remember current pimd (2.1.0-alpha27) cannot work with tunnel device. We will be able to release new pimd (2.2.0?) in order to make it work with tunnel devices. -- Hitoshi Asaeda From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Mon Feb 21 03:37:08 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA01362 for ; Mon, 21 Feb 2000 03:37:08 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id AAA77569 for pim-list; Mon, 21 Feb 2000 00:30:49 -0800 (PST) X-Authentication-Warning: catarina.usc.edu: majordom set sender to owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu using -f Received: from ing12.unife.it (server.ing.unife.it [192.167.215.12]) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA77564 for ; Mon, 21 Feb 2000 00:30:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from ieee.org (IDENT:gmazzini@dns.ing.unife.it [192.167.215.104]) by ing12.unife.it (8.9.3/8.9.3a) with ESMTP id JAA12391 for ; Mon, 21 Feb 2000 09:30:45 +0100 (MET) Message-ID: <38B0F7B5.C18F399B@ieee.org> Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 08:30:45 +0000 From: Gianluca Mazzini Organization: University of Ferrara X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.13-7mdksmp i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Linux & PIM Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Hi, > I have compiled pimd for linux 2.2.14 and I am running this > set up: local net 192.167.215/24, tunnel gre1 from a new interface > on same machine with addr 192.167.209.254 to a big multicast > route 193.204.120.1, running only PIM. > I have configured successfully the tunnel, well running, and tested > it with a direct route of 224.0.0.0/4 on gre1. Now I have attempted the > use of your last released pimd. I have modified a little the NO_VIF > return in order to accept the 193.204.120.1 as neighbor even if it is > not. The pimd come up and the registration on 193.204.120.1 works. > Now the problem is that no packet from 224 net are forwarded by > the pimd process. May be I have some trouble with the conf file, > I have tested a lot of different scheme always without success. > When, for example, a sdr is running the pimd -d give me the correct > table but oes not send any request to the chief router that i am > monitoring by means of tcpdump on the tunnel. > > Could you help me? > I have two students in thesis with me for mobile application on > Multicast waiting for a test bed system... > > Gianluca Mazzini From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Thu Feb 24 06:40:22 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA25991 for ; Thu, 24 Feb 2000 06:40:21 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id DAA28439 for pim-list; Thu, 24 Feb 2000 03:26:32 -0800 (PST) X-Authentication-Warning: catarina.usc.edu: majordom set sender to owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu using -f Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id DAA28434 for ; Thu, 24 Feb 2000 03:26:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA25743; Thu, 24 Feb 2000 06:26:24 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <200002241126.GAA25743@ietf.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" To: IETF-Announce: ; Cc: pim@catarina.usc.edu From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Reply-to: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-pim-simplekmp-01.txt Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2000 06:26:24 -0500 Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Protocol Independent Multicast Working Group of the IETF. Title : Simple Key Management Protocol for PIM Author(s) : T. Hardjono, B. Cain Filename : draft-ietf-pim-simplekmp-01.txt Pages : 8 Date : 23-Feb-00 This document describes a simple key management approach for the PIM multicast routing protocol, observing the key arrangement for PIM defined in [Wei98] for PIM version 2. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pim-simplekmp-01.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-pim-simplekmp-01.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pim-simplekmp-01.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <20000223092740.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pim-simplekmp-01.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-pim-simplekmp-01.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <20000223092740.I-D@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Fri Feb 25 16:24:26 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA21069 for ; Fri, 25 Feb 2000 16:24:25 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA35466 for pim-list; Fri, 25 Feb 2000 13:13:20 -0800 (PST) X-Authentication-Warning: catarina.usc.edu: majordom set sender to owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu using -f Received: from sol.extremenetworks.com (sol.extremenetworks.com [216.52.8.2]) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA35461 for ; Fri, 25 Feb 2000 13:13:20 -0800 (PST) Received: by SOL with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Fri, 25 Feb 2000 13:11:43 -0800 Message-ID: <808F64DDB492D3119D3C00508B5D8D7353A323@SOL> From: Desikan Saravanan To: "'pim@catarina.usc.edu'" Subject: FW: BSM fragmentations Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 13:11:37 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk > Folks, > > consider a situation where the bootstrap message needs to be fragmented > into two or more packets. > I see there is no indication in the bootstrap message format that this is > the last fragment. > and I dont see any message length field that could be of use to figure out > the end of the packet. > > Then how would I know that I have got all of the RP set? > Only when I know that I have a valid RP set, I can go and check the > validity of existing RP set > (as per last paragraph of section 3.6.3: Receiving and Forwarding > Bootstrap) > > I can wait till the next bootstrap message arrives with a different > fragment_tag (will result in poor converging) > or I can start a timer for X seconds and at the timeout I can consider I > have all the RP set. > > Does the spec say anything about this issue or Am I missing something > here? > Please clarify. > > Thanks & Best regards > Des > From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Fri Feb 25 16:52:26 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA21843 for ; Fri, 25 Feb 2000 16:52:25 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA35672 for pim-list; Fri, 25 Feb 2000 13:45:22 -0800 (PST) X-Authentication-Warning: catarina.usc.edu: majordom set sender to owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu using -f Received: from dthaler.microsoft.com ([131.107.152.20]) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA35667 for ; Fri, 25 Feb 2000 13:45:19 -0800 (PST) Received: (from dthaler@localhost) by dthaler.microsoft.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id PAA06793; Fri, 25 Feb 2000 15:21:29 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dthaler) From: Dave Thaler Message-Id: <200002252321.PAA06793@dthaler.microsoft.com> Subject: Re: FW: BSM fragmentations In-Reply-To: <808F64DDB492D3119D3C00508B5D8D7353A323@SOL> from Desikan Saravanan at "Feb 25, 2000 1:11:37 pm" To: dsaravanan@extremenetworks.com (Desikan Saravanan) Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 15:21:29 -0800 (PST) Cc: pim@catarina.usc.edu X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL43 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Desikan Saravanan writes: > > consider a situation where the bootstrap message needs to be fragmented > > into two or more packets. > > I see there is no indication in the bootstrap message format that this is > > the last fragment. > > and I dont see any message length field that could be of use to figure out > > the end of the packet. > > > > Then how would I know that I have got all of the RP set? If I remember correctly, you can operate on each group-prefix independently. For each group-prefix, you know when you get the RP-Set for that group-prefix by looking at the RP-Count-n and Frag RP-Cnt-n fields. > > Only when I know that I have a valid RP set, I can go and check the > > validity of existing RP set > > (as per last paragraph of section 3.6.3: Receiving and Forwarding > > Bootstrap) The paragraph in 3.6.3 can be applied one group-prefix at a time. This was seen to be an advantage in that you can immediately update some group-prefixes even if you haven't gotten other ones, with no ill effects. -Dave > > I can wait till the next bootstrap message arrives with a different > > fragment_tag (will result in poor converging) > > or I can start a timer for X seconds and at the timeout I can consider I > > have all the RP set. > > > > Does the spec say anything about this issue or Am I missing something > > here? > > Please clarify. > > > > Thanks & Best regards > > Des From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Sat Feb 26 19:27:39 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA19851 for ; Sat, 26 Feb 2000 19:27:38 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA31823 for pim-list; Thu, 24 Feb 2000 18:18:38 -0800 (PST) X-Authentication-Warning: catarina.usc.edu: majordom set sender to owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu using -f Received: from sol.extremenetworks.com (sol.extremenetworks.com [216.52.8.2]) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA31818 for ; Thu, 24 Feb 2000 18:18:37 -0800 (PST) Received: by SOL with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Thu, 24 Feb 2000 18:17:00 -0800 Message-ID: <808F64DDB492D3119D3C00508B5D8D7353A31B@SOL> From: Desikan Saravanan To: "'pim_ml'" Subject: BSM fragmentations Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2000 18:16:58 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Folks, consider a situation where the bootstrap message needs to be fragmented into two or more packets. I see there is no indication in the bootstrap message format that this is the last fragment. and I dont see any message length field that could be of use to figure out the end of the packet. Then how would I know that I have got all of the RP set? Only when I know that I have a valid RP set, I can go and check the validity of existing RP set (as per last paragraph of section 3.6.3: Receiving and Forwarding Bootstrap) I can wait till the next bootstrap message arrives with a different fragment_tag (will result in poor converging) or I can start a timer for X seconds and at the timeout I can consider I have all the RP set. Does the spec say anything about this issue or Am I missing something here? Please clarify. Thanks & Best regards Des From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Sun Feb 27 06:47:16 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA07720 for ; Sun, 27 Feb 2000 06:47:15 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id DAA57507 for pim-list; Sun, 27 Feb 2000 03:35:16 -0800 (PST) X-Authentication-Warning: catarina.usc.edu: majordom set sender to owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu using -f Received: from mailhost.iprg.nokia.com (mailhost.iprg.nokia.com [205.226.5.12]) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id DAA57502 for ; Sun, 27 Feb 2000 03:35:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from darkstar.iprg.nokia.com (darkstar.iprg.nokia.com [205.226.5.69]) by mailhost.iprg.nokia.com (8.9.3/8.9.3-GLGS) with ESMTP id DAA20442; Sun, 27 Feb 2000 03:34:31 -0800 (PST) Received: (from root@localhost) by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com (8.9.3/8.9.3-VIRSCAN) id DAA24358; Sun, 27 Feb 2000 03:34:31 -0800 X-Virus-Scanned: Sun, 27 Feb 2000 03:34:31 -0800 Nokia Silicon Valley Email Exploit Scanner Received: from (agni.iprg.nokia.com [205.226.8.100]) by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com SMTP/WTS (12.69) xma024236; Sun, 27 Feb 00 03:34:23 -0800 Received: from agni.iprg.nokia.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by agni.iprg.nokia.com (8.8.8/8.6.12) with ESMTP id DAA06625; Sun, 27 Feb 2000 03:34:23 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200002271134.DAA06625@agni.iprg.nokia.com> To: Desikan Saravanan cc: "'pim_ml'" Subject: Re: BSM fragmentations In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 24 Feb 2000 18:16:58 PST." <808F64DDB492D3119D3C00508B5D8D7353A31B@SOL> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <6622.951651263.1@agni.iprg.nokia.com> Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2000 03:34:23 -0800 From: Ravi Puvvala Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Each bootstrap message has a total rp count and each fragmented bootstrap message has the rp count in that particular fragment. If you keep track of the total rp count received from all the fragments, you would know if it is the last fragment or if you need to expect more. Ravi Desikan Saravanan writes: | Folks, | | consider a situation where the bootstrap message needs to be fragmented | into two or more packets. | I see there is no indication in the bootstrap message format that this is | the last fragment. | and I dont see any message length field that could be of use to figure out | the end of the packet. | | Then how would I know that I have got all of the RP set? | Only when I know that I have a valid RP set, I can go and check the validity | of existing RP set | (as per last paragraph of section 3.6.3: Receiving and Forwarding Bootstrap) | | I can wait till the next bootstrap message arrives with a different | fragment_tag (will result in poor converging) | or I can start a timer for X seconds and at the timeout I can consider I | have all the RP set. | | Does the spec say anything about this issue or Am I missing something here? | Please clarify. | | Thanks & Best regards | Des