From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Fri Jul 7 22:11:47 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 WAA17759 for ; Fri, 7 Jul 2000 22:11:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA56414 for pim-list; Fri, 7 Jul 2000 19:00:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: catarina.usc.edu: majordom set sender to owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu using -f Received: from usc.edu (root@usc.edu [128.125.253.136]) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA56409 for ; Fri, 7 Jul 2000 19:00:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sj-msg-core-crit.cisco.com (sj-msg-core-crit.cisco.com [171.71.163.10]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id TAA04751 for ; Fri, 7 Jul 2000 19:00:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from holbrook-dsl1.cisco.com (gigabit.cisco.com [10.34.2.22]) by sj-msg-core-crit.cisco.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA27368 for ; Fri, 7 Jul 2000 18:55:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: by holbrook-dsl1.cisco.com (Postfix, from userid 1563) id 392D4AC996; Fri, 7 Jul 2000 18:52:55 -0700 (PDT) From: Hugh Holbrook To: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: snapshot of the new pim-sm spec is available Reply-To: holbrook@cisco.com Message-Id: <20000708015255.392D4AC996@holbrook-dsl1.cisco.com> Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 18:52:55 -0700 (PDT) Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk PIM wizards, As discussed at the last IETF, Bill Fenner, Mark Handley, Isidor Kouvelas and I have been working on a rewrite of the PIM-SM spec. We have a snapshot available at: http://www.aciri.org/mjh/pimspec.ps This is a snapshot, and it has not been submitted to the draft editor; we will do that next week after we get comments and after we incorporate a few more changes. Remaining items include: adding (*,*,RP) support next week, some sections have insufficient explanations, clarification of exactly where we have fixed problems in the current spec, and a section about SSM, and surely countless typos to be discovered. The presentation is quite different from that of the old spec, but the protocol is the same. Hopefully, the new spec will make good sense to someone familiar with the protocol. We have not (intentionally) changed the behavior except in places where the current spec is known to be wrong or incomplete. Please take a look and let us know what you think. -Hugh, Bill, Mark and Isidor From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Mon Jul 10 13:00:14 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 NAA17208 for ; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 13:00:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA68866 for pim-list; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 09:45:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: catarina.usc.edu: majordom set sender to owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu using -f Received: from usc.edu (root@usc.edu [128.125.253.136]) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA68861 for ; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 09:45:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.routerware.com (mail.routerware.com [204.31.186.3]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id JAA14930 for ; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 09:45:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by NEWMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 09:49:02 -0700 Message-ID: <4F48C7B31A8BD311B1D20090279C34B2309E8C@clavin> From: Chris Hall To: "'holbrook@cisco.com'" , pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: RE: snapshot of the new pim-sm spec is available Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 09:53:56 -0700 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 Am I to take this to mean that PIM will still contain *,*,rp support? Sorry if I missed that post... thanks Chris Christopher J. Hall Software Engineer Wind River Networks 949.442.2066 chris.hall@windriver.com -----Original Message----- From: Hugh Holbrook [mailto:holbrook@cisco.com] Sent: Friday, July 07, 2000 6:53 PM To: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: snapshot of the new pim-sm spec is available PIM wizards, As discussed at the last IETF, Bill Fenner, Mark Handley, Isidor Kouvelas and I have been working on a rewrite of the PIM-SM spec. We have a snapshot available at: http://www.aciri.org/mjh/pimspec.ps This is a snapshot, and it has not been submitted to the draft editor; we will do that next week after we get comments and after we incorporate a few more changes. Remaining items include: adding (*,*,RP) support next week, some sections have insufficient explanations, clarification of exactly where we have fixed problems in the current spec, and a section about SSM, and surely countless typos to be discovered. The presentation is quite different from that of the old spec, but the protocol is the same. Hopefully, the new spec will make good sense to someone familiar with the protocol. We have not (intentionally) changed the behavior except in places where the current spec is known to be wrong or incomplete. Please take a look and let us know what you think. -Hugh, Bill, Mark and Isidor From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Mon Jul 10 14:09:20 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 OAA20628 for ; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 14:09:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA69439 for pim-list; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 11:01:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from usc.edu (root@usc.edu [128.125.253.136] (may be forged)) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA69434 for ; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 11:01:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sj-msg-core-1.cisco.com (sj-msg-core-1.cisco.com [171.71.163.11]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id LAA22286 for ; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 11:01:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scorpion.cisco.com (scorpion.cisco.com [171.69.18.74]) by sj-msg-core-1.cisco.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA07134; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 10:57:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (holbrook@localhost) by scorpion.cisco.com (8.8.5-Cisco.2-SunOS.5.5.1.sun4/CISCO.WS.1.2) with ESMTP id KAA27902; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 10:57:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200007101757.KAA27902@scorpion.cisco.com> X-Authentication-Warning: scorpion.cisco.com: holbrook owned process doing -bs To: Chris Hall cc: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Re: snapshot of the new pim-sm spec is available In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 10 Jul 2000 09:53:56 PDT." <4F48C7B31A8BD311B1D20090279C34B2309E8C@clavin> Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 10:57:08 -0700 From: Hugh Holbrook Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk The short answer is yes. Based on the recent discussion on this mailing list we (the authors of the new spec) concluded that we should propagate the (*,*,RP) support in the current spec to the new spec. We are planning to add it in, it's just that we haven't had time to do it yet. -Hugh >Am I to take this to mean that PIM will still contain *,*,rp support? Sorry >if I missed that post... > >thanks > >Chris > > >Christopher J. Hall >Software Engineer >Wind River Networks >949.442.2066 >chris.hall@windriver.com > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Hugh Holbrook [mailto:holbrook@cisco.com] >Sent: Friday, July 07, 2000 6:53 PM >To: pim@catarina.usc.edu >Subject: snapshot of the new pim-sm spec is available > > >PIM wizards, > >As discussed at the last IETF, Bill Fenner, Mark Handley, Isidor >Kouvelas and I have been working on a rewrite of the PIM-SM spec. We >have a snapshot available at: > > http://www.aciri.org/mjh/pimspec.ps > >This is a snapshot, and it has not been submitted to the draft editor; >we will do that next week after we get comments and after we >incorporate a few more changes. Remaining items include: adding >(*,*,RP) support next week, some sections have insufficient >explanations, clarification of exactly where we have fixed problems in >the current spec, and a section about SSM, and surely countless typos >to be discovered. > >The presentation is quite different from that of the old spec, but the >protocol is the same. Hopefully, the new spec will make good sense to >someone familiar with the protocol. We have not (intentionally) >changed the behavior except in places where the current spec is known >to be wrong or incomplete. > >Please take a look and let us know what you think. > >-Hugh, Bill, Mark and Isidor > From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Mon Jul 10 14:20:07 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 OAA21192 for ; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 14:20:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA69538 for pim-list; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 11:11:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: catarina.usc.edu: majordom set sender to owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu using -f Received: from usc.edu (root@usc.edu [128.125.253.136] (may be forged)) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA69533 for ; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 11:11:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-green.research.att.com (H-135-207-30-103.research.att.com [135.207.30.103]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id LAA29705 for ; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 11:11:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alliance.research.att.com (alliance.research.att.com [135.207.26.26]) by mail-green.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D22201E004; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 14:08:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from windsor.research.att.com (windsor.research.att.com [135.207.26.46]) by alliance.research.att.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA21659; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 14:08:55 -0400 (EDT) From: Bill Fenner Received: (from fenner@localhost) by windsor.research.att.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.5) id LAA13362; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 11:08:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200007101808.LAA13362@windsor.research.att.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII To: chris.hall@windriver.com Subject: RE: snapshot of the new pim-sm spec is available Cc: pim@catarina.usc.edu Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 11:08:54 -0700 Versions: dmail (solaris) 2.2g/makemail 2.9a Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk >Am I to take this to mean that PIM will still contain *,*,rp support? Sorry >if I missed that post... There was no clear consensus for removing it, and there are technical reasons (like BGMP interop) for keeping it; sorry for failing to reply after the discussion was over with my take on the result. Bill From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Mon Jul 10 16:09:58 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 QAA26799 for ; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 16:09:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA70643 for pim-list; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 13:02:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from usc.edu (root@usc.edu [128.125.253.136]) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA70638 for ; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 13:02:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sj-msg-core-2.cisco.com (sj-msg-core-2.cisco.com [171.69.43.88]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id NAA09983 for ; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 13:01:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scorpion.cisco.com (scorpion.cisco.com [171.69.18.74]) by sj-msg-core-2.cisco.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA10918 for ; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 12:57:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (holbrook@localhost) by scorpion.cisco.com (8.8.5-Cisco.2-SunOS.5.5.1.sun4/CISCO.WS.1.2) with ESMTP id MAA19723 for ; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 12:57:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200007101957.MAA19723@scorpion.cisco.com> X-Authentication-Warning: scorpion.cisco.com: holbrook owned process doing -bs cc: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Re: snapshot of the new pim-sm spec is available In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 07 Jul 2000 18:52:55 PDT." <20000708015255.392D4AC996@holbrook-dsl1.cisco.com> Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 12:57:36 -0700 From: Hugh Holbrook Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Some people have reported trouble reaching www.aciri.org this morning. There is a copy now available at ftp://ftpeng.cisco.com/ipmulticast/drafts/pimspec.ps.gz also. -Hugh >PIM wizards, > >As discussed at the last IETF, Bill Fenner, Mark Handley, Isidor >Kouvelas and I have been working on a rewrite of the PIM-SM spec. We >have a snapshot available at: > > http://www.aciri.org/mjh/pimspec.ps > >This is a snapshot, and it has not been submitted to the draft editor; >we will do that next week after we get comments and after we >incorporate a few more changes. Remaining items include: adding >(*,*,RP) support next week, some sections have insufficient >explanations, clarification of exactly where we have fixed problems in >the current spec, and a section about SSM, and surely countless typos >to be discovered. > >The presentation is quite different from that of the old spec, but the >protocol is the same. Hopefully, the new spec will make good sense to >someone familiar with the protocol. We have not (intentionally) >changed the behavior except in places where the current spec is known >to be wrong or incomplete. > >Please take a look and let us know what you think. > >-Hugh, Bill, Mark and Isidor > From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Tue Jul 11 07:48:46 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 HAA26371 for ; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 07:48:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id EAA74523 for pim-list; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 04:41:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: catarina.usc.edu: majordom set sender to owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu using -f Received: from usc.edu (root@usc.edu [128.125.253.136]) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id EAA74518 for ; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 04:41:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from red.juniper.net (natint.juniper.net [207.17.136.129]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id EAA27825 for ; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 04:41:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from garnet.juniper.net (garnet.juniper.net [172.17.28.17]) by red.juniper.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id EAA09671 for ; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 04:39:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from garnet.juniper.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by garnet.juniper.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id EAA35453 for ; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 04:39:48 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from pusateri@garnet.juniper.net) Message-Id: <200007111139.EAA35453@garnet.juniper.net> To: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: PIM Working Group MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <35450.963315588.1@garnet.juniper.net> Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 04:39:48 -0700 From: Tom Pusateri Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Please send agenda items for the PIM working group to me or the list. I'm going to take a few minutes to update the charter and I'm sure Bill, Mark, Hugh, and Isidor will be wanting to discuss the new spec (Most excellent work guys!) I missed the cutoff again for getting on the agenda but only by one day. Hopefully, they will be understanding. Thanks, Tom From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Thu Jul 13 14:20:15 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 OAA03989 for ; Thu, 13 Jul 2000 14:20:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA87627 for pim-list; Thu, 13 Jul 2000 11:11:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: catarina.usc.edu: majordom set sender to owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu using -f Received: from usc.edu (root@usc.edu [128.125.253.136] (may be forged)) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA87618 for ; Thu, 13 Jul 2000 11:11:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from arcturus.barak.net.il (arcturus.barak.net.il [212.150.150.40]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id LAA26011 for ; Thu, 13 Jul 2000 11:11:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from messenger.rnd.co.il ([209.88.194.205]) by arcturus.barak.net.il (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id UAA03036 for ; Thu, 13 Jul 2000 20:05:08 +0200 (IST) Received: by MESSENGER with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id <3WRLXFNG>; Thu, 13 Jul 2000 21:05:28 +0200 Message-ID: From: Alex Vorontsov To: "'pim@catarina.usc.edu'" Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2000 21:04:48 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1255" Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Hi ! What is behavior of PIM-DM router, if 2 ( or more ) its interfaces connected to the same LAN. > Thanks > > Alexander Vorontsov > > RADLAN Computer Communications Ltd. > Atidim Technological Park, Blgd. 4 > Tel-Aviv 61131, Israel > > E-mail: alexv@radlan.com > Tel: Int'l-972-3-6458534, Fax: Int'l-972-3-6487368 > http://www.radlan.com > > From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Thu Jul 13 21:05:47 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 VAA13946 for ; Thu, 13 Jul 2000 21:05:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id RAA89732 for pim-list; Thu, 13 Jul 2000 17:58:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: catarina.usc.edu: majordom set sender to owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu using -f Received: from usc.edu (root@usc.edu [128.125.253.136]) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA89727 for ; Thu, 13 Jul 2000 17:58:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from aardvark.aciri.org (aardvark.aciri.org [192.150.187.20]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id RAA24723 for ; Thu, 13 Jul 2000 17:58:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from aardvark.aciri.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by aardvark.aciri.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA20583; Thu, 13 Jul 2000 17:58:09 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mjh@aardvark.aciri.org) From: Mark Handley X-Organisation: ACIRI To: pim@catarina.usc.edu cc: holbrook@cisco.com, fenner@research.att.com, kouvelas@cisco.com, pusateri@juniper.net Subject: New PIM-SM Draft Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2000 17:58:09 -0700 Message-ID: <20581.963536289@aardvark.aciri.org> Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk We've just submitted the new PIM-SM draft to the ID editor as draft-ietf-pim-sm-v2-new-00. It's been revised a little since the version we sent out on Monday. Postscript and ASCII versions are available from: http://www.aciri.org/mjh/draft-ietf-pim-sm-v2-new-00.ps http://www.aciri.org/mjh/draft-ietf-pim-sm-v2-new-00.txt Both versions are also available from http://www.research.att.com/~fenner/mcast/pim/spec/ We recommend reading the Postscript version if at all possible, as we haven't yet attempted to turn the state-machines into ASCII-art, and the tables don't properly fit into 80 columns. The document is still missing (*,*,RP) mechanisms - we think we know how to include this in a fairly simple way, but haven't yet had time to write the text. Also some sections could do with a little more explanatory text, the Security Considerations section could do with expanding a little, and we ran out of time to add the "what's changed" since RFC 2362" section. We'd really appreciate your feedback - our web server logs show more than 70 different hosts retrieved the pre-release version from www.aciri.org, but only one person sent us comments! Cheers, Mark, Bill, Hugh and Isidor From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Fri Jul 14 14:27:37 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 OAA29592 for ; Fri, 14 Jul 2000 14:27:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA93597 for pim-list; Fri, 14 Jul 2000 11:17:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: catarina.usc.edu: majordom set sender to owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu using -f Received: from usc.edu (root@usc.edu [128.125.253.136]) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA93592 for ; Fri, 14 Jul 2000 11:16:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from postal.redback.com (postal.redback.com [155.53.12.9]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id LAA19744 for ; Fri, 14 Jul 2000 11:16:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from malt.redback.com (malt.redback.com [155.53.12.41]) by postal.redback.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E4C717BC19; Fri, 14 Jul 2000 11:13:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from lwei@localhost) by malt.redback.com (8.9.3-LCCHA/8.9.3/null redback solaris client) id LAA07565; Fri, 14 Jul 2000 11:13:07 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 11:13:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200007141813.LAA07565@malt.redback.com> From: Liming Wei To: mjh@aciri.org Cc: pim@catarina.usc.edu, holbrook@cisco.com, fenner@research.att.com, kouvelas@cisco.com, pusateri@juniper.net In-reply-to: <20581.963536289@aardvark.aciri.org> (message from Mark Handley on Thu, 13 Jul 2000 17:58:09 -0700) Subject: Re: New PIM-SM Draft Reply-To: lwei@redback.com Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk > From: Mark Handley > > We've just submitted the new PIM-SM draft to the ID editor as > draft-ietf-pim-sm-v2-new-00. It's been revised a little since the > version we sent out on Monday. > > Postscript and ASCII versions are available from: > http://www.aciri.org/mjh/draft-ietf-pim-sm-v2-new-00.ps > http://www.aciri.org/mjh/draft-ietf-pim-sm-v2-new-00.txt > > Both versions are also available from > http://www.research.att.com/~fenner/mcast/pim/spec/ > > We recommend reading the Postscript version if at all possible, as we > haven't yet attempted to turn the state-machines into ASCII-art, and > the tables don't properly fit into 80 columns. I'm going to read this version in a couple of days. > explanatory text, the Security Considerations section could do with > expanding a little, and we ran out of time to add the "what's changed" > since RFC 2362" section. I have resubmitted the PIM authentication draft as the -01 version. It was discussed/revised through a number of the WG meetings and consensus was reached. Not sure what you plan to do with the section in SM spec. But to provide some background information, the idea of having an independent security document was that the security mechanism can be moved forward without updating or interlocking with the changes in the basic SM spec (this is probably desireable in the future as well). It also makes it easy for the implementors to find what is related and what is not. > We'd really appreciate your feedback - our web server logs show more > than 70 different hosts retrieved the pre-release version from > www.aciri.org, but only one person sent us comments! It probably takes time for folks to get to it, esp if they are to compare the long text against their code. -Liming From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Tue Jul 18 06:48:42 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 GAA18678 for ; Tue, 18 Jul 2000 06:48:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id DAA12625 for pim-list; Tue, 18 Jul 2000 03:39:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: catarina.usc.edu: majordom set sender to owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu using -f Received: from usc.edu (root@usc.edu [128.125.253.136]) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id DAA12620 for ; Tue, 18 Jul 2000 03:39:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id DAA20383 for ; Tue, 18 Jul 2000 03:39:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA13825; Tue, 18 Jul 2000 06:35:45 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200007181035.GAA13825@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-sm-v2-new-00.txt,.ps Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 06:35:45 -0400 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 : Protocol Independent Multicast - Sparse Mode PIM-SM): Protocol Specification (Revised) Author(s) : B. Fenner, M. Handley, H. Holbrook, I. Kouvelas Filename : draft-ietf-pim-sm-v2-new-00.txt,.ps Pages : 101 Date : 17-Jul-00 This document specifies Protocol Independent Multicast - Sparse Mode (PIM-SM). PIM-SM is a multicast routing protocol that can use the underlying unicast routing information base or a separate multicast-capable routing information base. It builds unidirectional shared trees rooted at a Rendezvous Point (RP) per group, and optionally creates shortest-path trees per source. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pim-sm-v2-new-00.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-sm-v2-new-00.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-sm-v2-new-00.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: <20000717150012.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pim-sm-v2-new-00.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-pim-sm-v2-new-00.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <20000717150012.I-D@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Thu Jul 20 07:00:09 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 HAA19448 for ; Thu, 20 Jul 2000 07:00:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id DAA23394 for pim-list; Thu, 20 Jul 2000 03:50:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: catarina.usc.edu: majordom set sender to owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu using -f Received: from usc.edu (root@usc.edu [128.125.253.136] (may be forged)) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id DAA23389 for ; Thu, 20 Jul 2000 03:50:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id DAA14485 for ; Thu, 20 Jul 2000 03:50:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA12054; Thu, 20 Jul 2000 06:46:55 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200007201046.GAA12054@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-v2-auth-01.txt Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2000 06:46:55 -0400 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 : Authenticating PIM version 2 messages Author(s) : L. Wei Filename : draft-ietf-pim-v2-auth-01.txt Pages : 4 Date : 19-Jul-00 This draft specifies the use of IPSEC authentication header [KA98] to provide protocol message integrity protection and groupwise message origin authentication. The text in this draft will be either incorporated into or referenced by the PIM version 2 protocol specifications. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pim-v2-auth-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-v2-auth-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-v2-auth-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: <20000719141541.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pim-v2-auth-01.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-pim-v2-auth-01.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <20000719141541.I-D@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Thu Jul 20 07:00:40 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 HAA19740 for ; Thu, 20 Jul 2000 07:00:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id DAA23384 for pim-list; Thu, 20 Jul 2000 03:49:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: catarina.usc.edu: majordom set sender to owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu using -f Received: from usc.edu (root@usc.edu [128.125.253.136]) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id DAA23379 for ; Thu, 20 Jul 2000 03:49:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id DAA14398 for ; Thu, 20 Jul 2000 03:49:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA11531; Thu, 20 Jul 2000 06:46:02 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200007201046.GAA11531@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-sm-v2-new-00.txt,.ps Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2000 06:46:02 -0400 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 : Protocol Independent Multicast - Sparse Mode PIM-SM): Protocol Specification (Revised) Author(s) : B. Fenner, M. Handley, H. Holbrook, I. Kouvelas Filename : draft-ietf-pim-sm-v2-new-00.txt,.ps Pages : 101 Date : 17-Jul-00 This document specifies Protocol Independent Multicast - Sparse Mode (PIM-SM). PIM-SM is a multicast routing protocol that can use the underlying unicast routing information base or a separate multicast-capable routing information base. It builds unidirectional shared trees rooted at a Rendezvous Point (RP) per group, and optionally creates shortest-path trees per source. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pim-sm-v2-new-00.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-sm-v2-new-00.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-sm-v2-new-00.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: <20000717150012.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pim-sm-v2-new-00.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-pim-sm-v2-new-00.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <20000717150012.I-D@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Thu Jul 20 16:27:23 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 QAA13885 for ; Thu, 20 Jul 2000 16:27:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA25989 for pim-list; Thu, 20 Jul 2000 13:20:29 -0700 (PDT) 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 NAA25984; Thu, 20 Jul 2000 13:20:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rumi (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rumi.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA09950; Thu, 20 Jul 2000 13:20:26 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200007202020.NAA09950@rumi.usc.edu> To: Bill Fenner cc: chris.hall@windriver.com, pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Re: snapshot of the new pim-sm spec is available In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 10 Jul 2000 11:08:54 PDT." <200007101808.LAA13362@windsor.research.att.com> Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2000 13:20:26 -0700 From: Pavlin Ivanov Radoslavov Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk > >Am I to take this to mean that PIM will still contain *,*,rp support? Sorry > >if I missed that post... > > There was no clear consensus for removing it, and there are technical > reasons (like BGMP interop) for keeping it; sorry for failing to reply > after the discussion was over with my take on the result. > > Bill Going back to old discussion, there is still something that bothers me re. the technical reasons for keeping (*,*,RP). ===== In another email Dave Thaler wrote why we need (*,*,RP) for BGMP: "... Technically one would only need a bunch of (*,Gprefix,RP) joins per RP but those aren't specified, so a single (*,*,RP) per RP works :) ..." ===== The Encoded-Group-Address format in PIM-SM has a field "Mask Len", and because the E-G-A format is used in the Join/Prune messages, therefore we can have (*,Gprefix) J/P messages in PIM-SM. Hence, if there is no (*,*,RP) support, the border router will originate a number of (*,Gprefix) Joins that would be sent (implicitly, based on the mapping in the Bootstrap messages) toward the corresponding RP (instead of a single (*,*,RP) message). I don't think that sending a number of (*,Gprefix) messages instead of a single (*,*,RP) will create a large overhead. Only if the network configuration was such that the Gprefix->RP mapping is fragmented into a very large number of small prefixes, then the larger number of (*,Gprefix) joins may be an issue. However, fragmenting the Gprefix->RP mapping is anyway going to increase the Bootstrap/Cand-RP messages overhead, so it is very unlike that such configuration will be used in practice. However, if there was overlapping such as, to say, 224.0.0.0/8 maps to RP1 and 224.1.0.0/16 maps to RP2, then the (*,Gprefix) joins need to be sent toward the right RP. If the upstream routers toward RP1 and RP2 were the same, sending a single 224.0.0.0/8 Join should be OK. However, if an intermediate router receives 224.0.0.0/8 Join, and the upstream routers toward RP1 and RP2 and different, then it needs to send, for example, 224.1.0.0/16 Join toward RP2 and (224.0.0.0/8 Join, 224.1.0.0/16 Prune) toward RP1. If the intermediate routers cannot handle at all the (*,Gprefix) J/P, then we need (*,*,RP) to fix the situation. However, if a router handle (*,Gprefix) by just splitting each (*,Gprefix) Join/Prune into a number of (*,G) Join/Prunes, we still can get away by removing the (*,*,RP) support. The large number of (*,G) messages will be per-hop, because an upstream, more intelligent router can always aggregate them back into (*,Gprefix). Here is the time to ask two questions: * How do implementations that have been widely deployed handle (*,Gprefix) J/P messages? * Shoudn't the spec be explicit how a router has to handle a (*,Gprefix) J/P messages? ==== In another email Yunzhou Li wrote: "A (*,*,RP) state is an aggregation of multiple (*,G/prefix) states, or (*,*) state when the prefix length is 4 or less. Each (*,G/prefix) state again is an aggregation of numerous (*,G) and (S,G) states. With this interpretation, we don't have to do two lookups in the data forwarding plane. I think the new PIM-SM specification probably can reflect this fact. A high speed router may not allow too much intelligence and it may not generate revenue per-flow (S,G) or (*,G). In stead, it may generate revenue per aggregated bandwidth or (*,G/prefix). In particular, we allow a (*,*,RP) generator to create a forwarding policy like "accept all but reject...". This policy in turns can be propagated to all routers from the (*,*,RP) generator all the way to the RP. This is how we can benefit from (*,*,RP). At this point, I would think (*,*,RP) has a good match with BGMP (*,G/prefix) state." ==== If, instead of a single (*,*,RP) join message, a router receives all (*,Gprefix) joins that match this (*,*,RP) state, the router needs a little intelligence to find out that logically all those (*,Gprefix) joins correspond to a single (*,*,RP). But even without applying this logic, the mechanism used by this router to aggregate its state is up to the implementation, and the external (*,*,RP) join message will not help the router in making/improving the aggregation decision. Apart of those two arguments, I did not see any other reasons why we need (*,*,RP) support. Am I missing anything else? Pavlin From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Thu Jul 20 19:12:57 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 TAA01593 for ; Thu, 20 Jul 2000 19:12:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA27078 for pim-list; Thu, 20 Jul 2000 16:06:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: catarina.usc.edu: majordom set sender to owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu using -f Received: from usc.edu (root@usc.edu [128.125.253.136]) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA27072; Thu, 20 Jul 2000 16:06:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-blue.research.att.com (mail-blue.research.att.com [135.207.30.102]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id QAA17710; Thu, 20 Jul 2000 16:06:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alliance.research.att.com (alliance.research.att.com [135.207.26.26]) by mail-blue.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 305374CE3B; Thu, 20 Jul 2000 19:03:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from windsor.research.att.com (windsor.research.att.com [135.207.26.46]) by alliance.research.att.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA25556; Thu, 20 Jul 2000 19:03:52 -0400 (EDT) From: Bill Fenner Received: (from fenner@localhost) by windsor.research.att.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.5) id QAA04955; Thu, 20 Jul 2000 16:03:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200007202303.QAA04955@windsor.research.att.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII To: pavlin@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Re: snapshot of the new pim-sm spec is available Cc: pim@catarina.usc.edu Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2000 16:03:51 -0700 Versions: dmail (solaris) 2.2g/makemail 2.9a Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk The hash function ensures that the G->RP mapping is spread evenly among equal-cost RP's -- this means that the prefix of these G-prefix joins is most likely going to be the hash mask prefix. A (*,*,RP) Join in a domain with 3 RP's using the (vaguely) recommended hash mask prefix of 0xfffffffc therefore maps to somewhere on the order of 22 million (*,G-Prefix) Joins. Bill From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Thu Jul 20 20:12:52 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 UAA25739 for ; Thu, 20 Jul 2000 20:12:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id RAA27454 for pim-list; Thu, 20 Jul 2000 17:07:24 -0700 (PDT) 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 RAA27449; Thu, 20 Jul 2000 17:07:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rumi (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rumi.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA11432; Thu, 20 Jul 2000 17:07:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200007210007.RAA11432@rumi.usc.edu> To: Bill Fenner cc: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Re: snapshot of the new pim-sm spec is available In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 20 Jul 2000 16:03:51 PDT." <200007202303.QAA04955@windsor.research.att.com> Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2000 17:07:21 -0700 From: Pavlin Ivanov Radoslavov Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk > The hash function ensures that the G->RP mapping is spread evenly among > equal-cost RP's -- this means that the prefix of these G-prefix joins is > most likely going to be the hash mask prefix. A (*,*,RP) Join in a domain > with 3 RP's using the (vaguely) recommended hash mask prefix of 0xfffffffc > therefore maps to somewhere on the order of 22 million (*,G-Prefix) Joins. Ah, yes, then this seems to me a good technical reason to keep the (*,*,RP) support. Because even if the recommended hash mask value is modified to, say 16, instead of 30, this still means thousands of control messages. Pavlin From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Fri Jul 21 09:07:58 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 JAA08220 for ; Fri, 21 Jul 2000 09:07:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id GAA29829 for pim-list; Fri, 21 Jul 2000 06:00:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: catarina.usc.edu: majordom set sender to owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu using -f Received: from usc.edu (root@usc.edu [128.125.253.136]) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id GAA29824 for ; Fri, 21 Jul 2000 06:00:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nscolmar.colmar.uha.fr (nscolmar.colmar.uha.fr [194.167.108.34]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id GAA07951 for ; Fri, 21 Jul 2000 06:00:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from colmar.colmar.uha.fr (colmar.colmar.uha.fr [194.167.107.31]) by nscolmar.colmar.uha.fr (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA06705; Fri, 21 Jul 2000 14:23:11 +0200 Received: from Colmar.UHA.Fr (gtrrech6.colmar.uha.fr [192.168.30.6]) by colmar.colmar.uha.fr (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id OAA04960; Fri, 21 Jul 2000 14:56:33 +0100 (WET DST) Message-ID: <39784CF1.ECBAC655@Colmar.UHA.Fr> Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 15:15:29 +0200 From: Benoit HILT Reply-To: Benoit.HILT@colmar.uha.fr Organization: =?iso-8859-1?Q?D=E9pt=2E?= GTR - IUT de Colmar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [fr] (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: fr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pim@catarina.usc.edu CC: Kame snap users Subject: Bootstrap initial delay Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello, I'm working on KAME PIM-SM IPv6 testing. In the Bootstrap mechanim, the Bootstrap initial delay is not implemented. The source code is the same of your source code. Because the use of CRC32 for IPv6 adresses conversion is specified in the spec (draft-ietf-pim-v2-sm-01 page 34) for RP only, my question is : In the function bootstrap_initial_delay (rp.c), can I use a CRC-32 function to convert IPv6 adresses in 32-bits longs ? Thank for your help. B.HILT From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Fri Jul 21 16:34:45 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 QAA09522 for ; Fri, 21 Jul 2000 16:34:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA31876 for pim-list; Fri, 21 Jul 2000 13:29:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from usc.edu (root@usc.edu [128.125.253.136]) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA31871 for ; Fri, 21 Jul 2000 13:29:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhost.iprg.nokia.com (mailhost.iprg.nokia.com [205.226.5.12]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id NAA02387 for ; Fri, 21 Jul 2000 13:29:00 -0700 (PDT) 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 NAA21601; Fri, 21 Jul 2000 13:27:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from root@localhost) by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com (8.9.3/8.9.3-VIRSCAN) id NAA06842; Fri, 21 Jul 2000 13:27:27 -0700 X-Virus-Scanned: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 13:27:27 -0700 Nokia Silicon Valley Email Exploit Scanner Received: from bahadur.iprg.nokia.com (205.226.11.43) by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com(WTS.12.69) smtpdvrBH4x; Fri, 21 Jul 2000 13:27:24 PDT Received: from localhost (bahadur@localhost) by bahadur.iprg.nokia.com (8.8.8/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA18208; Fri, 21 Jul 2000 13:27:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: bahadur.iprg.nokia.com: bahadur owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 13:27:26 -0700 (PDT) From: Rahul Bahadur Reply-To: Rahul Bahadur To: pim@catarina.usc.edu cc: bahadur@iprg.nokia.com Subject: Question on (*,G) join/prune messages Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk draft-ietf-pim-v2-sm-03.txt; section 3.2.1: Periodic Join/Prune Messages: ... 1. ... The RP address (with RPT and WC bits set) is included in the join list of a periodic Join/Prune message under the following conditions: 1 .... 2 The outgoing interface list in the (*,G) or (*,*,RP) entry is non-NULL, or the router is the DR on the same interface as the RPF neighbor. Should not the last comment be further clarified as: The outgoing interface list in the (*,G) or (*,*,RP) entry is non-NULL, or the router is the DR on the same interface as the RPF neighbor and there are local members present on that (RPF) interface.(?) On the same point: draft-ietf-pim-sm-v2-new-00.txt Section 4.1.5. (State Summarization Macros) talks about: pim_include(*,G) = {all interfaces I such that: (( I_am_DR( I ) AND assert(*,G,I) == NULL ) OR AssertWinnner(*,G,I) == me ) AND igmp_desired(*,G,I) } However, Section 4.4.4, (Sending (*,G) Join/Prune Messages) does not mention the fact that a (*,G) join is sent towards the RP if the oif list is null and if the router is the DR on the RPF interface towards the RP and there are local members on the same RPF interface. Regards, Rahul From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Fri Jul 21 21:53:26 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 VAA08768 for ; Fri, 21 Jul 2000 21:53:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA33033 for pim-list; Fri, 21 Jul 2000 18:45:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: catarina.usc.edu: majordom set sender to owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu using -f Received: from usc.edu (root@usc.edu [128.125.253.136] (may be forged)) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA33028 for ; Fri, 21 Jul 2000 18:45:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sj-msg-core-crit.cisco.com (sj-msg-core-crit.cisco.com [171.71.163.10]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id SAA29316 for ; Fri, 21 Jul 2000 18:45:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from holbrook-dsl1.cisco.com (holbrook-dsl1.cisco.com [10.19.148.186]) by sj-msg-core-crit.cisco.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA17537; Fri, 21 Jul 2000 18:40:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Tnt.Cisco.COM (localhost.cisco.com [127.0.0.1]) by holbrook-dsl1.cisco.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F6A4AC998; Fri, 21 Jul 2000 15:12:39 -0700 (PDT) To: Rahul Bahadur Cc: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Re: Question on (*,G) join/prune messages In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 21 Jul 2000 13:27:26 PDT." Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 15:12:39 -0700 From: Hugh Holbrook Message-Id: <20000721221239.2F6A4AC998@holbrook-dsl1.cisco.com> Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Rahul, According to the Upstream (*,G) state machine of 4.4.4, a (*,G) join message is sent whenever the state machine enters the "Joined" state. This happens whenever JoinDesired(*,G) becomes true. JoinDesired(*,G) (on p. 26) is true whenever inherited_olist(*,G) is non-null. In the scenario you describe, the pim_include(*,g) macro at the DR includes the RPF interface. -Hugh >draft-ietf-pim-sm-v2-new-00.txt > Section 4.1.5. (State Summarization Macros) talks about: > pim_include(*,G) = > {all interfaces I such that: > (( I_am_DR( I ) AND assert(*,G,I) == NULL ) > OR AssertWinnner(*,G,I) == me ) > AND igmp_desired(*,G,I) } > >However, Section 4.4.4, (Sending (*,G) Join/Prune Messages) does not >mention the fact that a (*,G) join is sent towards the RP if the >oif list is null and if the router is the DR on the RPF interface towards >the RP and there are local members on the same RPF interface. > >Regards, >Rahul From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Wed Jul 26 08:01:04 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 IAA20351 for ; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 08:01:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id EAA77477 for pim-list; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 04:50:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: catarina.usc.edu: majordom set sender to owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu using -f Received: from usc.edu (root@usc.edu [128.125.253.136]) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id EAA77472 for ; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 04:50:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from exchange01.iirltd.co.uk ([193.133.64.178]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id EAA17062 for ; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 04:50:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by exchange01.iirltd.co.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 12:44:18 +0100 Message-ID: From: Richard Cooper To: Richard Cooper Subject: MPLS Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 12:44:08 +0100 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 Hello, You may remember that I sent you an email a few weeks ago regarding the MPLS conference I was working on. Well, I have now finished and printed the prorgamme and I would like to thank all of you who helped with my research or have agreed to speak. The conference will run the 25th-28th of September in London for full details please see the website www.iir-conferences.com/mpls Many Thanks Sarah Jones Senior Conference Producer, Transmission Events IIR Telecoms & Technology 0044 20 7915 5146 0044 20 7915 5001