From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Tue Aug 1 10:06:12 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 KAA14264 for ; Tue, 1 Aug 2000 10:06:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id GAA11045 for pim-list; Tue, 1 Aug 2000 06:56:51 -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 GAA11040 for ; Tue, 1 Aug 2000 06:56:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtprch1.nortel.com (smtprch1.nortelnetworks.com [192.135.215.14]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id GAA26646 for ; Tue, 1 Aug 2000 06:56:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zsc4c002.corpwest.baynetworks.com by smtprch1.nortel.com; Tue, 1 Aug 2000 08:40:32 -0500 Received: from zbl6c008.corpeast.baynetworks.com ([132.245.205.58]) by zsc4c002.corpwest.baynetworks.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2652.39) id QBFJ6V8T; Tue, 1 Aug 2000 06:40:28 -0700 Received: from nortelnetworks.com (SANDICKNT [132.245.139.132]) by zbl6c008.corpeast.baynetworks.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2650.21) id N70C7QB0; Tue, 1 Aug 2000 09:39:38 -0400 Message-ID: <3986D318.B3D6911B@nortelnetworks.com> Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 09:39:36 -0400 X-Sybari-Space: 00000000 00000000 00000000 From: "Hal Sandick" Reply-To: "Hal Sandick" Organization: Nortel Networks X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Benoit.HILT@colmar.uha.fr CC: pim@catarina.usc.edu, Kame snap users , "Brian Haberman" Subject: Re: Bootstrap initial delay References: <39784CF1.ECBAC655@Colmar.UHA.Fr> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------E8B8A531BA349FA08BC2ADD7" Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk --------------E8B8A531BA349FA08BC2ADD7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Benoit, Sorry for not responding to you sooner. Attached is section 4.1 from draft-ietf-pim-ipv6-03.txt. 4.1 PIM Header Checksum The checksum field in the PIM [PIM-SM, PIM-DM] header covers the entire PIM message (excluding the data portion in the Register message). When running PIM over IPv6, it must use the standard checksum calculation for IPv6 applications: the 16-bit one's complement of the one's complement sum of the entire contents of the packet, starting with the PIM packet header, and prepending a "pseudo-header" of IPv6 header fields, as specified in [RFC 2460, section 8.1]. The "Upper-Layer Packet Length" in the pseudo-header is set to the length of the PIM message. The Next Header value used in the pseudo-header is 103. If the packet's length is not an integral number of 16-bit words, the packet is padded with a byte of zero before performing the checksum calculation. Before computing the checksum, the checksum field in the PIM packet header is set to 0. Does this answer your question? regards, Hal and Brian Benoit HILT wrote: > 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 --------------E8B8A531BA349FA08BC2ADD7 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Benoit,

Sorry for not responding to you sooner.  Attached is section 4.1 from  draft-ietf-pim-ipv6-03.txt.

       4.1  PIM Header Checksum
 
        The checksum field in the PIM [PIM-SM, PIM-DM] header covers the entire
        PIM message (excluding the data portion in the Register message).  When
        running PIM over IPv6, it must use the standard checksum calculation
        for IPv6 applications: the 16-bit one's complement of the one's
        complement sum of the entire contents of the packet, starting with the
        PIM packet header, and prepending a "pseudo-header" of IPv6 header
        fields, as specified in [RFC 2460, section 8.1]. The "Upper-Layer
        Packet Length" in the pseudo-header is set to the length of the PIM
        message.  The Next Header value used in the pseudo-header is 103. If
        the packet's length is not an integral number of 16-bit words, the
        packet is padded with a byte of zero before performing the checksum
        calculation. Before computing the checksum, the checksum field in the
        PIM packet header is set to 0.

Does this answer your question?
 
regards,

Hal and Brian

Benoit HILT wrote:

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

--------------E8B8A531BA349FA08BC2ADD7-- From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Tue Aug 1 11:12:04 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 LAA05528 for ; Tue, 1 Aug 2000 11:12:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id IAA11452 for pim-list; Tue, 1 Aug 2000 08:02:55 -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 IAA11447 for ; Tue, 1 Aug 2000 08:02:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtprch1.nortel.com (smtprch1.nortelnetworks.com [192.135.215.14]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id IAA21002 for ; Tue, 1 Aug 2000 08:02:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zsc4c002.corpwest.baynetworks.com by smtprch1.nortel.com; Tue, 1 Aug 2000 09:39:35 -0500 Received: from zbl6c008.corpeast.baynetworks.com ([132.245.205.58]) by zsc4c002.corpwest.baynetworks.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2652.39) id QBFJ67T5; Tue, 1 Aug 2000 07:39:30 -0700 Received: from nortelnetworks.com (SANDICKNT [132.245.139.132]) by zbl6c008.corpeast.baynetworks.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2650.21) id N70C7Q13; Tue, 1 Aug 2000 10:39:29 -0400 Message-ID: <3986E0F8.2B8299C7@nortelnetworks.com> Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 10:38:50 -0400 X-Sybari-Space: 00000000 00000000 00000000 From: "Hal Sandick" Reply-To: "Hal Sandick" Organization: Nortel Networks X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Can't switch back to shared Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bill and Isadore, Can you re-iterate your explanation why a router can't switch back to the shared tree from the SPT? Thanks. Regards, Hal From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Wed Aug 2 12:06:22 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 MAA07105 for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 12:06:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id IAA16978 for pim-list; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 08:52:30 -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 IAA16973 for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 08:52:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ertpg14e1.nortelnetworks.com (ertpg14e1.nortelnetworks.com [47.234.0.35]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id IAA17543 for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 08:52:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zsc4c002.corpwest.baynetworks.com by ertpg14e1.nortelnetworks.com; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 11:36:46 -0400 Received: from zbl6c008.corpeast.baynetworks.com ([132.245.205.58]) by zsc4c002.corpwest.baynetworks.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2652.39) id QDCSJJJG; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 08:36:43 -0700 Received: from nortelnetworks.com (SANDICKNT [132.245.139.192]) by zbl6c008.corpeast.baynetworks.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2650.21) id N70C7R1F; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 11:35:52 -0400 Message-ID: <39883FD5.3EEDD547@nortelnetworks.com> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 11:35:49 -0400 X-Sybari-Space: 00000000 00000000 00000000 From: "Hal Sandick" Reply-To: "Hal Sandick" Organization: Nortel Networks X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: archive Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit where is the mail archive. It's not at the url listed in the work charter at ietf.org. regards, Hal From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Wed Aug 2 13:11:29 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 NAA28435 for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 13:11:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA17423 for pim-list; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 10:02:02 -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 KAA17418 for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 10:02:01 -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 KAA04678 for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 10:02:02 -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 8DDF01E02E; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 12:59:22 -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 MAA07006; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 12:59:22 -0400 (EDT) From: Bill Fenner Received: (from fenner@localhost) by windsor.research.att.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.5) id JAA13409; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 09:59:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200008021659.JAA13409@windsor.research.att.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII To: hsandick@nortelnetworks.com Subject: Re: archive Cc: pim@catarina.usc.edu Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 09:59:21 -0700 Versions: dmail (solaris) 2.2g/makemail 2.9a Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk http://www.aciri.org/fenner/mcast/pim/html-archive/ has all the messages from the secretariat's archive (i.e. since September, 1998), and should be updated daily. It is not, however, an official WG archive. Bill From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Wed Aug 2 13:29:56 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 NAA04456 for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 13:29:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA17718 for pim-list; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 10:20:12 -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 KAA17713; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 10:20:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rumi (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rumi.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA78193; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 10:20:04 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200008021720.KAA78193@rumi.usc.edu> To: "Hal Sandick" cc: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Re: archive In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 02 Aug 2000 11:35:49 EDT." <39883FD5.3EEDD547@nortelnetworks.com> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 10:20:04 -0700 From: Pavlin Ivanov Radoslavov Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk > where is the mail archive. It's not at the url listed in the work > charter at ietf.org. > > regards, > > Hal The URL is ftp://catarina.usc.edu/pub/pim/mail-archive/pim/ or http://netweb.usc.edu/pim/mail-archive/pim/ The first one is the URL listed at the IETF PIM charter web page, (http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/pim-charter.html), and it works. Pavlin From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Wed Aug 2 14:03:25 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 OAA15566 for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 14:03:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA18205 for pim-list; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 10:54:33 -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 KAA18200 for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 10:54:32 -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 KAA14824 for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 10:54:32 -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 KAA08971; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 10:52:51 -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 KAA06785; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 10:52:40 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from pusateri@garnet.juniper.net) Message-Id: <200008021752.KAA06785@garnet.juniper.net> To: Bill Fenner cc: hsandick@nortelnetworks.com, pim@catarina.usc.edu, pusateri@juniper.net Subject: Re: archive In-Reply-To: Message from Bill Fenner of "Wed, 02 Aug 2000 09:59:21 PDT." <200008021659.JAA13409@windsor.research.att.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <6782.965238760.1@garnet.juniper.net> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 10:52:40 -0700 From: Tom Pusateri Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk In message <200008021659.JAA13409@windsor.research.att.com> you write: > >http://www.aciri.org/fenner/mcast/pim/html-archive/ >has all the messages from the secretariat's archive (i.e. since >September, 1998), and should be updated daily. It is not, >however, an official WG archive. > > Bill The offical archive is ftp://catarina.usc.edu/pub/pim/mail-archive/pim This is on the working group web page. Tom From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Wed Aug 2 14:56:34 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 OAA01948 for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 14:56:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA18790 for pim-list; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 11:44:59 -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 LAA18778 for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 11:44:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ertpg14e1.nortelnetworks.com (ertpg14e1.nortelnetworks.com [47.234.0.35]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id LAA23213 for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 11:44:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zsc4c002.corpwest.baynetworks.com by ertpg14e1.nortelnetworks.com; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 14:07:59 -0400 Received: from zbl6c008.corpeast.baynetworks.com ([132.245.205.58]) by zsc4c002.corpwest.baynetworks.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2652.39) id QDCSJ8AC; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 11:07:55 -0700 Received: from nortelnetworks.com (SANDICKNT [132.245.139.161]) by zbl6c008.corpeast.baynetworks.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2650.21) id N70C7RKZ; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 14:07:52 -0400 Message-ID: <39886371.AAA962D@nortelnetworks.com> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 14:07:45 -0400 X-Sybari-Space: 00000000 00000000 00000000 From: "Hal Sandick" Reply-To: "Hal Sandick" Organization: Nortel Networks X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: fenner@research.att.com, kouvelas@cisco.com CC: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: switch back to pim shared tree Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bill and Isadore, Can you re-iterate your explanation why a router can't switch back to the shared tree from the SPT? Thanks. Regards, Hal From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Wed Aug 2 16:30:04 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 QAA05423 for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 16:30:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA19653 for pim-list; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 13:18:44 -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 NAA19648 for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 13:18:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nectar.attlabs.att.com (wireless-133-218.ietf.marconi.com [147.73.133.218]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id NAA15099 for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 13:18:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from fenner@localhost) by nectar.attlabs.att.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id QAA27232; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 16:17:41 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from fenner) Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 16:17:41 -0400 (EDT) From: Bill Fenner Message-Id: <200008022017.QAA27232@nectar.attlabs.att.com> To: hsandick@nortelnetworks.com Subject: Re: switch back to pim shared tree Cc: kouvelas@cisco.com, pim@catarina.usc.edu Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Hal, It's not quite that *no* router can switch; it's just that not all routers can switch. It's a side effect of how you have to handle the RP-on-a-stick problem: RP | | R1 / \ / \ R2 R3 | | M S M is a group member, S is a source. R2 (M's DR) is joined to the (*,G) tree due to M's group membership. R3 is S's DR. When S starts sending, R3 Registers to the RP. Let's say that the RP chooses to create an SPT branch, so he sends an (S,G) Join to R1 which it propogates to R3. When R1 starts getting the traffic from R3, it sends an (S,G,rpt) prune to RP. RP now has no reason to get the traffic, so stops sending (S,G) joins. R1 has to continue sending (S,G) Joins in order to cause traffic to continue flowing. This is Cisco's "Turnaround rules". Now consider the following topology: RP | | M2-R4------R1-----R3-S | | R2 | M1 (note: this adds R4 with another member M2 but is otherwise equivalent to the above topology). Both R2 and R4 send (*,G) Joins to R1. R3 Registers to the RP, data flows down the shared tree, RP starts sending (S,G) joins, and R4 also starts sending (S,G) joins because it prefers to create shortest-path trees (but R2 prefers the shared tree). If R4 stops joining the (S,G) [e.g. because M2 has left, or because S's rate has fallen below its threshold], R1 cannot stop joining since it can't tell between this situation and the previous one. Basically, once an SPT is set up, the portion between the shared tree and the source cannot be torn down unless the source stops sending. Bill From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Wed Aug 2 17:58:16 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 RAA07557 for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 17:58:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA20445 for pim-list; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 14:49:16 -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 OAA20440 for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 14:49:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dino-pc.procket.com (flowpoint.procket.com [205.253.146.41]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id OAA03020 for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 14:49:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from dino@localhost) by dino-pc.procket.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA21957; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 14:47:37 -0700 Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 14:47:37 -0700 Message-Id: <200008022147.OAA21957@dino-pc.procket.com> X-Authentication-Warning: dino-pc.procket.com: dino set sender to dino@dino-pc.procket.com using -f From: Dino Farinacci To: fenner@research.att.com CC: hsandick@nortelnetworks.com, kouvelas@cisco.com, pim@catarina.usc.edu In-reply-to: <200008022017.QAA27232@nectar.attlabs.att.com> (message from Bill Fenner on Wed, 2 Aug 2000 16:17:41 -0400 (EDT)) Subject: Re: switch back to pim shared tree References: <200008022017.QAA27232@nectar.attlabs.att.com> Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk >> RP >> | >> | >> R1 >> / \ >> / \ >> R2 R3 >> | | >> M S >> When R1 starts getting the traffic from >> R3, it sends an (S,G,rpt) prune to RP. RP now has no reason to get To be precise, R1 doesn't start sending the (S,G,rpt) Prune at this time, it does so after it creates (S,G) state (from the RP join message) and the next time it's periodic Join/Prune message transmission timer expires. At that time, R1 sends a (S,G,rpt) Prune because the RPF neighbor for it's (*,G) entry and (S,G) entry are different. Dino From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Thu Aug 3 12:47:47 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 MAA18149 for ; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 12:47:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA26317 for pim-list; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 09:29:23 -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 JAA26312 for ; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 09:29:19 -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 JAA15344 for ; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 09:29:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kouvelas-u10.cisco.com (kouvelas-u10.cisco.com [171.69.65.54]) by sj-msg-core-1.cisco.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAB00373; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 09:24:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (kouvelas@localhost) by kouvelas-u10.cisco.com (8.8.8-Cisco List Logging/CISCO.WS.1.2) with ESMTP id JAA22334; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 09:23:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200008031623.JAA22334@kouvelas-u10.cisco.com> X-Authentication-Warning: kouvelas-u10.cisco.com: kouvelas owned process doing -bs To: Dino Farinacci cc: fenner@research.att.com, hsandick@nortelnetworks.com, kouvelas@cisco.com, pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Re: switch back to pim shared tree In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 02 Aug 2000 14:47:37 PDT." <200008022147.OAA21957@dino-pc.procket.com> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 09:23:45 -0700 From: Isidor Kouvelas Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk In message <200008022147.OAA21957@dino-pc.procket.com>, Dino Farinacci writes: >>> RP >>> | >>> | >>> R1 >>> / \ >>> / \ >>> R2 R3 >>> | | >>> M S >>> When R1 starts getting the traffic from >>> R3, it sends an (S,G,rpt) prune to RP. RP now has no reason to get > > To be precise, R1 doesn't start sending the (S,G,rpt) Prune at this time, it > does so after it creates (S,G) state (from the RP join message) and the > next time it's periodic Join/Prune message transmission timer expires. > At that time, R1 sends a (S,G,rpt) Prune because the RPF neighbor for it's > (*,G) entry and (S,G) entry are different. > Actually just receiving the (S,G) Join from the RP is not enough for R1 to start sending (S,G,rpt) Prunes towards the RP. R1 also has to wait for traffic to arrive on the (S,G) RPF interface so that the SPTbit will be set. thanks Isidor From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Thu Aug 3 14:01:44 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 OAA14089 for ; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 14:01:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA27382 for pim-list; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 10:49:46 -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 KAA27377 for ; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 10:49:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dino-pc.procket.com (flowpoint.procket.com [205.253.146.41]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id KAA14708 for ; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 10:49:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from dino@localhost) by dino-pc.procket.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA30105; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 10:49:09 -0700 Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 10:49:09 -0700 Message-Id: <200008031749.KAA30105@dino-pc.procket.com> X-Authentication-Warning: dino-pc.procket.com: dino set sender to dino@dino-pc.procket.com using -f From: Dino Farinacci To: kouvelas@cisco.com CC: fenner@research.att.com, hsandick@nortelnetworks.com, kouvelas@cisco.com, pim@catarina.usc.edu In-reply-to: <200008031623.JAA22334@kouvelas-u10.cisco.com> (message from Isidor Kouvelas on Thu, 03 Aug 2000 09:23:45 -0700) Subject: Re: switch back to pim shared tree References: <200008031623.JAA22334@kouvelas-u10.cisco.com> Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk >> Actually just receiving the (S,G) Join from the RP is not enough for >> R1 to start sending (S,G,rpt) Prunes towards the RP. R1 also has to >> wait for traffic to arrive on the (S,G) RPF interface so that the >> SPTbit will be set. Yes, if you mean that R1 shouldn't prune S off the shared tree until it is sure it is geting data from S on the soruce tree, then this is true. Dino From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Mon Aug 7 14:18:29 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 OAA00472 for ; Mon, 7 Aug 2000 14:18:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA48884 for pim-list; Mon, 7 Aug 2000 11:01:38 -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 LAA48879 for ; Mon, 7 Aug 2000 11:01:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ziggy.stardust.com (root@ns.stardust.com [205.184.205.34]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id LAA15366 for ; Mon, 7 Aug 2000 11:01:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pleiades (dhcp204-96.stardust.com [205.184.204.96]) by ziggy.stardust.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian/GNU) with SMTP id KAA27447 for ; Mon, 7 Aug 2000 10:55:33 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.20000807105535.01434bf0@stardust.com> X-Sender: jasonu@stardust.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 10:55:35 -0700 To: pim@catarina.usc.edu From: Jason Utz Subject: Call for multicast papers - iBAND at ISPCON Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by catarina.usc.edu id LAA48880 Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Greetings! IP Multicast is one of the core technologies covered at the iBAND events. We would like to continue its progress at the upcoming iBAND at ISPCON Conference on November 8-10, 2000, in San Jose, CA. iBAND at ISPCON is a gathering place for key industry people to come together and learn about developments in the new Internet technologies: * Service Provisioning * Traffic Management * Performance Measurement * Your iBAND at ISPCON participation will help expose network engineers and other technology savvy professionals to the latest and greatest in IP Multicast technology. My name is Jason Utz, conference manager for iBAND at ISPCON Conference. Stardust.com's CTO Martin Hall and I would like to invite you to share you progress and ideas with other relevant professionals in one or more ways: · Speaker Proposal * BOF Proposal * Showcase Participation * We value your expertise and look forward to receiving your speaker proposals to reflect the state of the art in IP Multicast technology. Proposals are due no later than Friday, August 18, 2000. To find guidance and more information, please visit http://www.stardust.com/iband5/speakers.htm http://www.stardust.com for network engineers offers additional opportunities to supply information and progress for IP Multicast updates and technologies: - conference sessions available in MP3 format, - live interviews on Stardust.com TalkRadio, - provide white papers and have them maintained in a Stardust.com Web library. All these options provide you with a large arena to deliver your working group's information and other updates. Please visit http://www.stardust.com to see what our site offers to its visitors. We want to help you drive this technology area forward so please let me know how you'd like to participate. Please contact me via email with any questions. Best regards, Jason Utz Conference Manager Stardust.com Jasonu@stardust.com www.stardust.com ***************** Stardust.com********************* Visit Stardust.com http://www.stardust.com Making sense of new Internet stuff Visit Stardust Talkradio Mondays in MP3 Format! *************************************************** Home of the IP Multicast Initiative (IPMI) the QoS Forum (QOSF) and the Wireless Multimedia Forum (WMF) NEW! *************************************************** UPCOMING EVENTS: *iBAND at ISPCON - Nov. 8-10, 2000, San Jose, CA *WISE, The Wireless Internet Services Event - Nov. 6-7, San Jose, CA ***************************************************** Jason Utz Conference Manager 15575 Los Gatos Blvd Suite C Fax 408/402-0567 Los Gatos, CA 95032 From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Wed Aug 9 08:00:33 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 IAA10362 for ; Wed, 9 Aug 2000 08:00:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id BAA56872 for pim-list; Wed, 9 Aug 2000 01:05:22 -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 BAA56867 for ; Wed, 9 Aug 2000 01:05:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay1.alcatel.be (alc119.alcatel.be [195.207.101.119]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id BAA00118 for ; Wed, 9 Aug 2000 01:05:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from btm34m.sh.bel.alcatel.be (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay1.alcatel.be (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e7981fr15733; Wed, 9 Aug 2000 10:01:45 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from alcatel.be (bt0522 [138.203.196.92]) by btm34m.sh.bel.alcatel.be (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8/1.1) with ESMTP id KAA12433; Wed, 9 Aug 2000 10:00:32 +0200 (MET DST) Message-ID: <39910FCC.594067F6@alcatel.be> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 10:01:16 +0200 From: Dirk Ooms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: holbrook@cisco.com CC: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Re: snapshot of the new pim-sm spec is available References: <20000708015255.392D4AC996@holbrook-dsl1.cisco.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The old spec used to have a section on how to handle unicast route changes, which I can't find back in the new spec. Is it intended this way or will it be added later on? dirk Hugh Holbrook wrote: > > 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 Wed Aug 9 12:00:46 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 MAA10695 for ; Wed, 9 Aug 2000 12:00:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id IAA58717 for pim-list; Wed, 9 Aug 2000 08:46:09 -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 IAA58712 for ; Wed, 9 Aug 2000 08:46:08 -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 IAA10530 for ; Wed, 9 Aug 2000 08:46:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kouvelas-u10.cisco.com (kouvelas-u10.cisco.com [171.69.65.54]) by sj-msg-core-1.cisco.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA21201; Wed, 9 Aug 2000 08:42:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (kouvelas@localhost) by kouvelas-u10.cisco.com (8.8.8-Cisco List Logging/CISCO.WS.1.2) with ESMTP id IAA25748; Wed, 9 Aug 2000 08:41:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200008091541.IAA25748@kouvelas-u10.cisco.com> X-Authentication-Warning: kouvelas-u10.cisco.com: kouvelas owned process doing -bs To: Dirk Ooms cc: holbrook@cisco.com, pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Re: snapshot of the new pim-sm spec is available In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 09 Aug 2000 10:01:16 +0200." <39910FCC.594067F6@alcatel.be> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 08:41:52 -0700 From: Isidor Kouvelas Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Dirk Ooms writes: >The old spec used to have a section on how to handle unicast route >changes, which I can't find back in the new spec. Is it intended this >way or will it be added later on? There are transitions that are triggered by route changes in the upstream Join/Prune state machines. Some text may need to be added to the spec. thanks Isidor >dirk > >Hugh Holbrook wrote: >> >> 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 Wed Aug 9 16:22:40 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 QAA19288 for ; Wed, 9 Aug 2000 16:22:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA60037 for pim-list; Wed, 9 Aug 2000 13:14:27 -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 NAA60032 for ; Wed, 9 Aug 2000 13:14:22 -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 NAA25353 for ; Wed, 9 Aug 2000 13:14:22 -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 NAA15745; Wed, 9 Aug 2000 13:10:23 -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 NAA25322; Wed, 9 Aug 2000 13:10:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200008092010.NAA25322@scorpion.cisco.com> X-Authentication-Warning: scorpion.cisco.com: holbrook owned process doing -bs To: Isidor Kouvelas cc: Dirk Ooms , pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Re: snapshot of the new pim-sm spec is available In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 09 Aug 2000 08:41:52 PDT." <200008091541.IAA25748@kouvelas-u10.cisco.com> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 13:10:06 -0700 From: Hugh Holbrook Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk In particular, it is the transition on the (S,G) upstream state machine that is triggered when "MRIB_next_hop_to(S) != cached_MRIB_next_hop_to_S". There is a similar transition in upstream (*,G) state machine. The actions associated with this transition are to send a Join to the new next hop and a Prune to the old next hop, and reset the J/P Periodic timer. We will add some text that explains the details of this. -Hugh >Dirk Ooms writes: >>The old spec used to have a section on how to handle unicast route >>changes, which I can't find back in the new spec. Is it intended this >>way or will it be added later on? > >There are transitions that are triggered by route changes in the >upstream Join/Prune state machines. Some text may need to be added to >the spec. > >thanks >Isidor > >>dirk >> >>Hugh Holbrook wrote: >>> >>> 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 Thu Aug 10 09:17:49 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 JAA20549 for ; Thu, 10 Aug 2000 09:17:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id GAA63400 for pim-list; Thu, 10 Aug 2000 06:07:11 -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] (may be forged)) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id GAA63395 for ; Thu, 10 Aug 2000 06:07:10 -0700 (PDT) From: fred@cisco.com 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 GAA22384 for ; Thu, 10 Aug 2000 06:07:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from irp-view7.cisco.com (irp-view7.cisco.com [171.69.25.24]) by sj-msg-core-2.cisco.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id GAA01750; Thu, 10 Aug 2000 06:03:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: (fred@localhost) by irp-view7.cisco.com (8.8.8-Cisco List Logging/CISCO.WS.1.2) id GAA29921; Thu, 10 Aug 2000 06:02:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 06:02:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200008101302.GAA29921@irp-view7.cisco.com> To: fenner@research.att.com, kouvelas@cisco.com, pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: draft-ietf-pim-sm-v2-new-00.txt Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk I notice that you recently posted a new internet draft. A document that might be worth reading is http://www.ietf.org/ID-nits.html This document was put together by members of the IESG to help the community know what are the most common problems that we see in documents, whether from working groups or individual submissions, and pro-actively avoid them. This is an automatic email; please don't conclude that I have discovered something awful about your draft, as I haven't even read it yet. Rather, I'm just letting you know that there is a list of common issues that get raised over and over again in IESG reviews, and I'd like to save you the hassle by letting you see for yourself whether any of them apply. Let me know if you have any questions I can answer. From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Fri Aug 11 00:55:20 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 AAA23031 for ; Fri, 11 Aug 2000 00:55:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id VAA66469 for pim-list; Thu, 10 Aug 2000 21:48:20 -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 VAA66464 for ; Thu, 10 Aug 2000 21:48:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from shuttle.wide.toshiba.co.jp (shuttle.wide.toshiba.co.jp [202.249.10.124]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id VAA01139 for ; Thu, 10 Aug 2000 21:48:16 -0700 (PDT) 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 NAA03417; Fri, 11 Aug 2000 13:32:17 +0900 (JST) Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 13:42:11 +0900 Message-ID: From: JINMEI Tatuya / =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCP0BMQEMjOkgbKEI=?= To: hsandick@nortelnetworks.com Cc: Benoit.HILT@colmar.uha.fr, pim@catarina.usc.edu, haberman@nortelnetworks.com Subject: Re: Bootstrap initial delay In-Reply-To: In your message of "Tue, 01 Aug 2000 09:39:36 -0400" <3986D318.B3D6911B@nortelnetworks.com> References: <39784CF1.ECBAC655@Colmar.UHA.Fr> <3986D318.B3D6911B@nortelnetworks.com> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.3.0 (Roam) Emacs/20.6 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: 42 Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk I removed "snap-users@kame.net" from the cc field, since this is not an implementation specific issue. >>>>> On Tue, 01 Aug 2000 09:39:36 -0400, >>>>> "Hal Sandick" said: > Sorry for not responding to you sooner. Attached is section 4.1 from > draft-ietf-pim-ipv6-03.txt. > 4.1 PIM Header Checksum ...(snip). > Does this answer your question? I don't think so. The problem is about how to calculate bootstrap parameters. draft-ietf-pim-sm-v2-new-00.txt specifies (part of) it as follows: if ( bestPriority == myPriority) { AddrDelay = log_2(bestAddr - myAddr) / 16 } else { AddrDelay = 2 - (myAddr / 2^31) } [page 68] However, this is not suitable for IPv6, since IPv6 addresses are 128bits in length. The specification clearly states how the RP hash should be calculated in IPv6: For IPv6 addresses, we recommend using the equivalent IPv4 address for an IPv4-compatible address, and the CRC-32 checksum [7] of all other IPv6 addresses. Benoit's question is thus whether or not the same approach can/should be applied for bootstrap parameters, I think. JINMEI, Tatuya Communication Platform Lab. Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp. jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Fri Aug 11 08:21:11 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 IAA11457 for ; Fri, 11 Aug 2000 08:21:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id FAA67965 for pim-list; Fri, 11 Aug 2000 05:14:25 -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] (may be forged)) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id FAA67960 for ; Fri, 11 Aug 2000 05:14:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ertpg14e1.nortelnetworks.com (ertpg14e1.nortelnetworks.com [47.234.0.35]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id FAA27752 for ; Fri, 11 Aug 2000 05:14:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zsc4c002.corpwest.baynetworks.com by ertpg14e1.nortelnetworks.com; Fri, 11 Aug 2000 08:07:09 -0400 Received: from zbl6c000.corpeast.baynetworks.com ([132.245.205.50]) by zsc4c002.corpwest.baynetworks.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2652.39) id QHJQDGG5; Fri, 11 Aug 2000 05:07:07 -0700 Received: from nortelnetworks.com (clemson.corpeast.baynetworks.com [132.245.252.101]) by zbl6c000.corpeast.baynetworks.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2652.39) id QFFQKPQ2; Fri, 11 Aug 2000 08:07:05 -0400 Message-ID: <3993EB5B.43BC4966@nortelnetworks.com> Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 08:02:35 -0400 X-Sybari-Space: 00000000 00000000 00000000 From: "Brian Haberman" Organization: Nortel Networks X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win95; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp CC: "Hal Sandick" , Benoit.HILT@colmar.uha.fr, pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Re: Bootstrap initial delay References: <39784CF1.ECBAC655@Colmar.UHA.Fr> <3986D318.B3D6911B@nortelnetworks.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit We (the authors of the PIM for IPv6 draft) will be revising that document based on the new spec. We will have to look at these rules and determine how they apply to IPv6. Brian JINMEI Tatuya / $B?@L@C#:H(B wrote: > > I removed "snap-users@kame.net" from the cc field, since this is not > an implementation specific issue. > > >>>>> On Tue, 01 Aug 2000 09:39:36 -0400, > >>>>> "Hal Sandick" said: > > > Sorry for not responding to you sooner. Attached is section 4.1 from > > draft-ietf-pim-ipv6-03.txt. > > > 4.1 PIM Header Checksum > ...(snip). > > > Does this answer your question? > > I don't think so. The problem is about how to calculate bootstrap > parameters. draft-ietf-pim-sm-v2-new-00.txt specifies (part of) it as > follows: > > if ( bestPriority == myPriority) { > AddrDelay = log_2(bestAddr - myAddr) / 16 > } else { > AddrDelay = 2 - (myAddr / 2^31) > } > [page 68] > > However, this is not suitable for IPv6, since IPv6 addresses are > 128bits in length. > > The specification clearly states how the RP hash should be calculated > in IPv6: > > For IPv6 addresses, we recommend using the equivalent IPv4 address > for an IPv4-compatible address, and the CRC-32 checksum [7] of all > other IPv6 addresses. > > Benoit's question is thus whether or not the same approach can/should > be applied for bootstrap parameters, I think. > > JINMEI, Tatuya > Communication Platform Lab. > Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp. > jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp -- Brian Haberman Nortel Networks haberman@nortelnetworks.com From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Thu Aug 17 12:26:16 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 MAA29604 for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 12:26:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA96476 for pim-list; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 09:15:08 -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 JAA96464; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 09:15:07 -0700 (PDT) From: announce@leisurewebcams.com Received: from mail.yourdomain.com (m319-mp1-cvx1a.man.ntl.com [62.252.197.63]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with SMTP id JAA20073; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 09:14:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200008171614.JAA20073@usc.edu> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 13:37:54 Subject: LeisureWebcams.com - See the World To: undisclosed-recipients:; Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk LeisureWebcams.com is a recently launched website specialising in providing free LIVE access to over 1,500 webcams and 2,000 Tourist Offices world wide. Check it out:- http://www.leisurewebcams.com/ This offers you the chance to check out live and frequently updated images of your chosen location through the webcams and get detailed local knowledge through the Tourist Offices. Along with booking holidays direct through our travel partner, there is the opportunity to sell your unwanted clothes and equipment through our free Swap Shop. There is a lot to see, so if you have enjoyed your trip through our site, do tell your friends and let us know through 'Your Views'. If you have any suggestions for the site, or queries, please feel free to contact me at cy@LeisureWebcams.com. I look forward to hearing from you. Kind regards, Charlie Yates MARKETING DIRECTOR LeisureWebcams.com From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Fri Aug 18 03:10:08 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 DAA24554 for ; Fri, 18 Aug 2000 03:10:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id AAA99971 for pim-list; Fri, 18 Aug 2000 00:01:36 -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 AAA99966 for ; Fri, 18 Aug 2000 00:01:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from uldns1.unil.ch (uldns1.unil.ch [130.223.8.20]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id AAA16274 for ; Fri, 18 Aug 2000 00:01:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=uldns1.unil.ch) by uldns1.unil.ch with esmtp (Exim 3.14 #1) for pim@catarina.usc.edu id 13Pg5F-0004pq-00; Fri, 18 Aug 2000 08:56:53 +0200 Received: from pcvidy104a.unil.ch ([130.223.8.40]) by uldns1.unil.ch with smtp (Exim 3.14 #1) for pim@catarina.usc.edu id 13Pg5E-0004po-00; Fri, 18 Aug 2000 08:56:52 +0200 Message-Id: <4.1.20000818083431.0094a4e0@pop-server.unil.ch> X-Sender: hnguyen@pop-server.unil.ch X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 08:57:42 +0200 To: pim@catarina.usc.edu From: Ha Nguyen Subject: SPT-bit during Register process Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Hello, Congratulations for the new draft-ietf-pim-sm-v2-new-00.ps. I have a remark concerning SPT-bit during the Register process. This bit must be set to "1" when the RP receives the 1st data packet on the SPT tree. The Update_SPTbit procedure (see page 15) contains a line that should carry this action ( RPF_interface(S) != RPF_interface(RP)). But the definition of RPF_interface(RP) at the RP is "the virtual interface on which register packets are received" (see page 13): so we have RPF_interface(S)= RPF_interface(RP) and SPT-bit will not be set to "1". By the way, is there any discussion group on PIM that I can join ? Best regards, Ha Nguyen University of Lausanne From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Mon Aug 21 09:57:18 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 JAA00960 for ; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 09:57:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id GAA15652 for pim-list; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 06:42:22 -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 GAA15647 for ; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 06:42:20 -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 GAA29661 for ; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 06:42:19 -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 PAA06672; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 15:09:57 +0200 Received: from Colmar.UHA.Fr (gtrrech2.colmar.uha.fr [192.168.30.2]) by colmar.colmar.uha.fr (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id PAA09371; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 15:40:04 +0100 (WET DST) Message-ID: <39A1317A.D7A82828@Colmar.UHA.Fr> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 15:41:14 +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 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.0.36 i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Brian Haberman CC: jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp, Hal Sandick , pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Bootstrap initial delay References: <39784CF1.ECBAC655@Colmar.UHA.Fr> <3986D318.B3D6911B@nortelnetworks.com> <3993EB5B.43BC4966@nortelnetworks.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello, sorry for long answer delay, now I'm back from holidays. I confirm to you that Tatuya's interpretation is correct. For the hash function all details for taking in part IPv6 are given. What happens with the IPv6 adresses to calculate the bootstrap initial delay. The specification didn't say it. Sincerely B.HILT From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Thu Aug 24 08:07:57 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 IAA15535 for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 08:07:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id EAA31226 for pim-list; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 04:57:00 -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 EAA31221 for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 04:56:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from uldns1.unil.ch (uldns1.unil.ch [130.223.8.20]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id EAA15730 for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 04:56:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=uldns1.unil.ch) by uldns1.unil.ch with esmtp (Exim 3.14 #1) for pim@catarina.usc.edu id 13Rvcu-0004x2-00; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 13:56:56 +0200 Received: from pcvidy104a.unil.ch ([130.223.8.40]) by uldns1.unil.ch with smtp (Exim 3.14 #1) for pim@catarina.usc.edu id 13Rvct-0004x0-00; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 13:56:55 +0200 Message-Id: <4.1.20000824113526.0094bd60@pop-server.unil.ch> X-Sender: hnguyen@pop-server.unil.ch X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 13:58:06 +0200 To: pim@catarina.usc.edu From: Ha Nguyen Subject: Which cause sending Join(S,G) when switching to SPT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Hello, On draft-ietf-pim-sm-v2-new-00.ps, switching from the shared tree to SPT is described on page 5 as sending a Join(S,G) toward S. Figure 6 on page 27 shows that when JoinDesired(S,G)->TRUE, Upstream(S,G)->"joined" and Join(S,G) is sent. The draft does not specify which action makes JoinDesired(S,G)->TRUE in case of switchover to SPT (the router decides to switchover by basing on some threshold in traffic density). I would propose that the router simply start the KeepaliveTimer(S,G). Ha Nguyen University of Lausanne From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Thu Aug 24 11:50:45 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 LAA19511 for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 11:50:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id IAA31981 for pim-list; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 08:35:57 -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] (may be forged)) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA31976 for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 08:35:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from broadcom.ie (oscar.broadcom.ie [192.107.110.20]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id IAA24789 for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 08:35:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pc5 (pc5.broadcom.ie [192.107.110.105]) by broadcom.ie (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA09297 for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 16:34:17 +0100 Message-ID: <003a01c00de0$da30f1d0$696e6bc0@broadcom.ie> From: "Mike Cronin" To: Subject: source code query Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 16:34:53 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0037_01C00DE9.3B4BAC50" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0037_01C00DE9.3B4BAC50 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello all, I am a student on work experience and have been given a job relating to = multicast=20 routing. I have been searching extensively for free source code or = pre-compiled=20 executable software for multicast routing protocols, especially PIM - = Protocol=20 Independant Multicast, but any of the others such as DVMRP or MOSPF = would be=20 sufficient. I have also been looking for IGMP (Internet Group Management = Protocol)=20 source code to implement and administer a multicast group. I hope to = integrate this=20 project on Linux or FreeBSD servers. Since I have had no luck checking = the various multicast sites I was hoping you might be able to help me on = this one. Thank you for your time. =20 Yours sincerely, Michael Cronin, Broadcom Eireann Research Ltd., Kestrel House, Clanwilliam Place, Dublin 2, IRELAND. +353 1 604 6065. ------=_NextPart_000_0037_01C00DE9.3B4BAC50 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello all,

I am a student on = work experience=20 and have been given a job relating to multicast
routing. I have been = searching extensively for free source code or pre-compiled =
executable=20 software for multicast routing protocols, especially PIM - Protocol=20
Independant Multicast, but any of the others such as DVMRP or MOSPF = would be=20
sufficient. I have also been looking for IGMP (Internet Group = Management=20 Protocol)
source code to implement and administer a multicast group. = I hope=20 to integrate this
project on Linux or FreeBSD servers. Since I have = had no=20 luck checking the various multicast sites I was hoping you might be able = to help=20 me on this one. Thank you for your=20 time.
    
   =20         Yours=20 sincerely,
           =20         Michael = Cronin,
   =20             &= nbsp;  =20 Broadcom Eireann Research Ltd.,
   =20             &= nbsp;  =20 Kestrel House,
   =20             &= nbsp;  =20 Clanwilliam Place,
   =20             &= nbsp;  =20 Dublin 2,
   =20             &= nbsp;  =20 IRELAND.
   =20             &= nbsp;  =20 +353 1 604 6065.
------=_NextPart_000_0037_01C00DE9.3B4BAC50-- From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Thu Aug 24 17:41:08 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 RAA24342 for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 17:41:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA34091 for pim-list; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 14:24:28 -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 OAA34086 for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 14:24:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from motgate3.mot.com ([144.189.100.103]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id OAA09635 for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 14:24:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: [from pobox2.mot.com (pobox2.mot.com [136.182.15.8]) by motgate3.mot.com (motgate3 2.1) with ESMTP id OAA05033 for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 14:12:59 -0700 (MST)] Received: [from il02exi02.comm.mot.com (il02exi02.comm.mot.com [145.1.204.41]) by pobox2.mot.com (MOT-pobox2 2.0) with ESMTP id OAA00037 for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 14:14:51 -0700 (MST)] Received: by il02exi02.comm.mot.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 16:14:51 -0500 Message-ID: <01FAF65DEA16D4119B95009027E78F3149D833@il02exm26.comm.mot.com> From: Narayanan Vidya-CVN065 To: "'pim'" Subject: Whereabouts of the PIM-DM draft Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 16:14:46 -0500 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 Can anyone point me to the latest version of the PIM-DM spec? thanks, Vidya From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Fri Aug 25 04:21:38 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 EAA14211 for ; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 04:21:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id BAA36319 for pim-list; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 01:13:44 -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 BAA36314 for ; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 01:13:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from uldns1.unil.ch (uldns1.unil.ch [130.223.8.20]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id BAA16194 for ; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 01:13:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=uldns1.unil.ch) by uldns1.unil.ch with esmtp (Exim 3.14 #1) for pim@catarina.usc.edu id 13SEYi-0006QL-00; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:09:52 +0200 Received: from pcvidy104a.unil.ch ([130.223.8.40]) by uldns1.unil.ch with smtp (Exim 3.14 #1) for pim@catarina.usc.edu id 13SEYi-0006QJ-00; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:09:52 +0200 Message-Id: <4.1.20000825094908.00935f00@pop-server.unil.ch> X-Sender: hnguyen@pop-server.unil.ch X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:10:45 +0200 To: pim@catarina.usc.edu From: Ha Nguyen Subject: Prune(S,G,rpt) is not sent immediately during SPT switchover Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by catarina.usc.edu id BAA36315 Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hello, toward S ------A------ toward RP ¦ receiver r(*,G) When draft-ietf-pim-sm-v2-new-00.ps is applied to the above configuration during SPT switchover, router A does not send immediately Prune(S,G,rpt) toward RP when it receives the 1st data packet from S on the SPT tree. This prune is only sent on the next periodic Join(*,G) (see 4.4.6). Proposition: when 1st data packet arrives on SPT tree, send Prune(S,G,rpt) if RPF_interface(S) != RPF_interface(RP). Ha Nguyen University of Lausanne From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Fri Aug 25 04:31:50 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 EAA14341 for ; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 04:31:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id BAA36365 for pim-list; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 01:22:56 -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 BAA36360 for ; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 01:22:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from uldns1.unil.ch (uldns1.unil.ch [130.223.8.20]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id BAA18830 for ; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 01:22:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=uldns1.unil.ch) by uldns1.unil.ch with esmtp (Exim 3.14 #1) for pim@catarina.usc.edu id 13SElJ-0006gq-00; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:22:53 +0200 Received: from pcvidy104a.unil.ch ([130.223.8.40]) by uldns1.unil.ch with smtp (Exim 3.14 #1) for pim@catarina.usc.edu id 13SElI-0006go-00; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:22:53 +0200 Message-Id: <4.1.20000825101240.00940310@pop-server.unil.ch> X-Sender: hnguyen@pop-server.unil.ch X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:23:46 +0200 To: pim@catarina.usc.edu From: Ha Nguyen Subject: DR mechanism does not warrant best path to RP Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by catarina.usc.edu id BAA36361 Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hello, When draft-ietf-pim-sm-v2-new-00.ps is applied to the following configuration, if router B is elected DR, shared tree from RP to receiver r is not the best path. --RP------A------B----¦ ¦ ¦----r(*,G) -------------C----¦ Ha Nguyen From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Fri Aug 25 10:48:48 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 KAA21775 for ; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:48:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id HAA38023 for pim-list; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 07:40:27 -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] (may be forged)) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id HAA38018 for ; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 07:40:25 -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 HAA12307 for ; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 07:40:21 -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 HAA05209; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 07:38:31 -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 HAA66234; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 07:37:46 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from pusateri@garnet.juniper.net) Message-Id: <200008251437.HAA66234@garnet.juniper.net> To: Narayanan Vidya-CVN065 cc: "'pim'" , pusateri@juniper.net Subject: Re: Whereabouts of the PIM-DM draft In-Reply-To: Message from Narayanan Vidya-CVN065 of "Thu, 24 Aug 2000 16:14:46 CDT." <01FAF65DEA16D4119B95009027E78F3149D833@il02exm26.comm.mot.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <66231.967214266.1@garnet.juniper.net> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 07:37:46 -0700 From: Tom Pusateri Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk In message <01FAF65DEA16D4119B95009027E78F3149D833@il02exm26.comm.mot.com> you write: >Can anyone point me to the latest version of the PIM-DM spec? > >thanks, >Vidya There is a link to it on the USC PIM page: ftp://catarina.usc.edu/pub/pim/index.html I'm not sure if there is more recent copy or not but I couldn't find one. Thanks, Tom From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Fri Aug 25 11:57:48 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 LAA23276 for ; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 11:57:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id IAA38540 for pim-list; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 08:48:41 -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 IAA38535 for ; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 08:48:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from thing.uits.indiana.edu (IDENT:root@thing.uits.indiana.edu [129.79.17.113]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id IAA16581 for ; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 08:48:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from mpd@localhost) by thing.uits.indiana.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA22126; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:50:41 -0500 Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:50:41 -0500 From: Matthew Davy To: Mike Cronin Cc: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Re: source code query Message-ID: <20000825105041.E21925@indiana.edu> Mail-Followup-To: Mike Cronin , pim@catarina.usc.edu References: <003a01c00de0$da30f1d0$696e6bc0@broadcom.ie> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.2i In-Reply-To: <003a01c00de0$da30f1d0$696e6bc0@broadcom.ie>; from mcn@broadcom.ie on Thu, Aug 24, 2000 at 04:34:53PM +0100 Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk There are links to a couple of PIM implementations on: http://netweb.usc.edu/pim/ - Matt ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Matthew Davy mpd@indiana.edu 812-855-7728 University Information Technology Services Network Operations ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- On Thu, Aug 24, 2000 at 04:34:53PM +0100, Mike Cronin wrote: > Hello all, > > I am a student on work experience and have been given a job relating to multicast > routing. I have been searching extensively for free source code or pre-compiled > executable software for multicast routing protocols, especially PIM - Protocol > Independant Multicast, but any of the others such as DVMRP or MOSPF would be > sufficient. I have also been looking for IGMP (Internet Group Management Protocol) > source code to implement and administer a multicast group. I hope to integrate this > project on Linux or FreeBSD servers. Since I have had no luck checking the various multicast sites I was hoping you might be able to help me on this one. Thank you for your time. > > Yours sincerely, > Michael Cronin, > Broadcom Eireann Research Ltd., > Kestrel House, > Clanwilliam Place, > Dublin 2, > IRELAND. > +353 1 604 6065. From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Fri Aug 25 13:59:59 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 NAA25722 for ; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 13:59:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA39418 for pim-list; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:52:51 -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 KAA39413 for ; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:52:50 -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 KAA26126 for ; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:52:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kouvelas-u10.cisco.com (kouvelas-u10.cisco.com [171.69.65.54]) by sj-msg-core-2.cisco.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA15127; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:48:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (kouvelas@localhost) by kouvelas-u10.cisco.com (8.8.8-Cisco List Logging/CISCO.WS.1.2) with ESMTP id KAA02459; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:48:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200008251748.KAA02459@kouvelas-u10.cisco.com> X-Authentication-Warning: kouvelas-u10.cisco.com: kouvelas owned process doing -bs To: Ha Nguyen cc: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Re: DR mechanism does not warrant best path to RP In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:23:46 +0200." <4.1.20000825101240.00940310@pop-server.unil.ch> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:48:35 -0700 From: Isidor Kouvelas Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk This is how PIM works. Nothing to do with the new spec... I Ha Nguyen writes: >Hello, > >When draft-ietf-pim-sm-v2-new-00.ps is applied to the following configuration, >if router B is elected DR, shared tree from RP to receiver r is not the best >path. > >--RP------A------B----| > | |----r(*,G) > -------------C----| > >Ha Nguyen From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Fri Aug 25 14:00:36 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 OAA25750 for ; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 14:00:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA39395 for pim-list; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:51:19 -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 KAA39390 for ; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:51:18 -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 KAA25065 for ; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:51:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kouvelas-u10.cisco.com (kouvelas-u10.cisco.com [171.69.65.54]) by sj-msg-core-1.cisco.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA18359; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:47:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (kouvelas@localhost) by kouvelas-u10.cisco.com (8.8.8-Cisco List Logging/CISCO.WS.1.2) with ESMTP id KAA02452; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:46:56 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200008251746.KAA02452@kouvelas-u10.cisco.com> X-Authentication-Warning: kouvelas-u10.cisco.com: kouvelas owned process doing -bs To: Ha Nguyen cc: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Re: Prune(S,G,rpt) is not sent immediately during SPT switchover In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:10:45 +0200." <4.1.20000825094908.00935f00@pop-server.unil.ch> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:46:55 -0700 From: Isidor Kouvelas Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Spec already includes this logic. - Router A is receiving packets from the source on the shared tree - Router A decides to switch to the SPT and hence update the KAT(S,G) - This causes JoinDesired(S,G) to become true and an (S,G) Join is triggered - When the first packet arrives on the shortest path, A will receive it on the RPF interface towards the source and because JoinDesired(S,G) is true it will set the SPT bit. - Setting the SPT bit will cause PruneDesired(S,G,rpt) to become true and the upstream (S,G,rpt) JP state machine to transition from not pruned to pruned state thus triggering an (S,G,rpt)Prune. thanks I Ha Nguyen writes: >Hello, > >toward S ------A------ toward RP > ¦ > receiver r(*,G) > >When draft-ietf-pim-sm-v2-new-00.ps is applied to the above configuration >during SPT switchover, router A does not send immediately Prune(S,G,rpt) towar >d >RP when it receives the 1st data packet from S on the SPT tree. This prune is >only sent on the next periodic Join(*,G) (see 4.4.6). > >Proposition: when 1st data packet arrives on SPT tree, send Prune(S,G,rpt) if >RPF_interface(S) != RPF_interface(RP). > >Ha Nguyen >University of Lausanne > From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Mon Aug 28 01:01:12 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 BAA17462 for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 01:01:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id VAA95653 for pim-list; Sun, 27 Aug 2000 21:51:04 -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 VAA95648 for ; Sun, 27 Aug 2000 21:51:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hetnet.nl (net015s.hetnet.nl [194.151.104.155]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id VAA20786 for ; Sun, 27 Aug 2000 21:51:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pecan ([63.201.230.164]) by hetnet.nl with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.387.38); Mon, 28 Aug 2000 06:48:42 +0200 Message-ID: <001601c02906$be836a80$a4e6c93f@icsi.berkeley.edu> From: "Wilbert de Graaf" To: "Mike Cronin" Cc: References: <003a01c00de0$da30f1d0$696e6bc0@broadcom.ie> Subject: Re: source code query Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 21:44:08 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0013_01C028CC.10ABAE20" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C028CC.10ABAE20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Michael, I have an implementation of IGMPv3 on FreeBSD (patches for 4.0 and 4.1) = available on my website: http://home.hetnet.nl/~wilbertdg/igmpv3.html - Wilbert ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Mike Cronin=20 To: pim@catarina.usc.edu=20 Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2000 8:34 AM Subject: source code query Hello all, I am a student on work experience and have been given a job relating to = multicast=20 routing. I have been searching extensively for free source code or = pre-compiled=20 executable software for multicast routing protocols, especially PIM - = Protocol=20 Independant Multicast, but any of the others such as DVMRP or MOSPF = would be=20 sufficient. I have also been looking for IGMP (Internet Group Management = Protocol)=20 source code to implement and administer a multicast group. I hope to = integrate this=20 project on Linux or FreeBSD servers. Since I have had no luck checking = the various multicast sites I was hoping you might be able to help me on = this one. Thank you for your time. =20 Yours sincerely, Michael Cronin, Broadcom Eireann Research Ltd., Kestrel House, Clanwilliam Place, Dublin 2, IRELAND. +353 1 604 6065. ------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C028CC.10ABAE20 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Michael,
 
I have an implementation of IGMPv3 on FreeBSD (patches for 4.0 and = 4.1)=20 available on my website:
 
http://home.hetnet.= nl/~wilbertdg/igmpv3.html
 
- Wilbert
 
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Mike Cronin =
Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2000 8:34 AM
Subject: source code query

Hello all,

I am a student on = work experience=20 and have been given a job relating to multicast
routing. I have been = searching extensively for free source code or pre-compiled =
executable=20 software for multicast routing protocols, especially PIM - Protocol=20
Independant Multicast, but any of the others such as DVMRP or MOSPF = would be=20
sufficient. I have also been looking for IGMP (Internet Group = Management=20 Protocol)
source code to implement and administer a multicast group. = I hope=20 to integrate this
project on Linux or FreeBSD servers. Since I have = had no=20 luck checking the various multicast sites I was hoping you might be able = to help=20 me on this one. Thank you for your=20 time.
    
   =20         Yours=20 sincerely,
           =20         Michael = Cronin,
   =20             &= nbsp;  =20 Broadcom Eireann Research Ltd.,
   =20             &= nbsp;  =20 Kestrel House,
   =20             &= nbsp;  =20 Clanwilliam Place,
   =20             &= nbsp;  =20 Dublin 2,
   =20             &= nbsp;  =20 IRELAND.
   =20             &= nbsp;  =20 +353 1 604 6065.
------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C028CC.10ABAE20-- From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Mon Aug 28 07:27:55 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 HAA03641 for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 07:27:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id EAA97310 for pim-list; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 04:20:39 -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 EAA97305 for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 04:20:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp1.cluster.oleane.net (smtp1.cluster.oleane.net [195.25.12.16]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id EAA15073 for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 04:20:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from oleane (dyn-1-1-234.Vin.dialup.oleane.fr [195.25.4.234]) by smtp1.cluster.oleane.net with SMTP id NAA60453; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 13:20:04 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <020001c010e1$df343300$0401a8c0@oleane.com> From: "Peter Lewis" To: Subject: MPLS World Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 13:17:11 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_01F4_01C010F2.4659E380" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_01F4_01C010F2.4659E380 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MPLS World, third edition, Paris 6-9 February. The most important conference, with more than 700 delegates. Speakers may still submit papers untill september 15th. =20 MPLS World is also the largest exhibition in this area. =20 Please take a look on: http://www.upperside.fr/congress/conf.htm =20 ------=_NextPart_000_01F4_01C010F2.4659E380 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MPLS World, third edition, Paris 6-9 = February.
The most = important=20 conference, with more than 700 delegates.
Speakers may = still submit=20 papers untill september 15th.
 
MPLS World is also the largest exhibition in this=20 area.
 
Please take a look on:
 
http://www.upperside.f= r/congress/conf.htm
 
------=_NextPart_000_01F4_01C010F2.4659E380-- From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Mon Aug 28 09:56:04 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 JAA09034 for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 09:56:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id GAA97958 for pim-list; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 06:48:52 -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 GAA97953 for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 06:48:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from uldns1.unil.ch (uldns1.unil.ch [130.223.8.20]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id GAA13807 for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 06:48:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=uldns1.unil.ch) by uldns1.unil.ch with esmtp (Exim 3.14 #1) id 13TPDV-0002mr-00; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 15:44:49 +0200 Received: from pcvidy104a.unil.ch ([130.223.8.40]) by uldns1.unil.ch with smtp (Exim 3.14 #1) id 13TPDU-0002mo-00; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 15:44:49 +0200 Message-Id: <4.1.20000828151610.00935c40@pop-server.unil.ch> X-Sender: hnguyen@pop-server.unil.ch X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 15:45:46 +0200 To: Isidor Kouvelas From: Ha Nguyen Subject: Re: Prune(S,G,rpt) is not sent immediately during SPT switchover Cc: pim@catarina.usc.edu In-Reply-To: <200008251746.KAA02452@kouvelas-u10.cisco.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by catarina.usc.edu id GAA97954 Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit I wonder if I have an up-to-date draft (draft-ietf-pim-sm-v2-new-00.ps). Anyway, in this draft, on page 30 PruneDesired is defined as follow: bool PruneDesired(S,G,rpt) { return (JoinDesired(*,G) AND inherited_olist(S,G,rpt)= = NULL) } So setting SPT-bit does not influence PruneDesired. Best regards At 10:46 25.08.00 -0700, you wrote: > >Spec already includes this logic. >- Router A is receiving packets from the source on the shared tree >- Router A decides to switch to the SPT and hence update the KAT(S,G) >- This causes JoinDesired(S,G) to become true and an (S,G) Join is > triggered >- When the first packet arrives on the shortest path, A will receive > it on the RPF interface towards the source and because > JoinDesired(S,G) is true it will set the SPT bit. >- Setting the SPT bit will cause PruneDesired(S,G,rpt) to become true > and the upstream (S,G,rpt) JP state machine to transition from > not pruned to pruned state thus triggering an (S,G,rpt)Prune. > >thanks >I > >Ha Nguyen writes: >>Hello, >> >>toward S ------A------ toward RP >> ¦ >> receiver r(*,G) >> >>When draft-ietf-pim-sm-v2-new-00.ps is applied to the above configuration >>during SPT switchover, router A does not send immediately Prune(S,G,rpt) towar >>d >>RP when it receives the 1st data packet from S on the SPT tree. This prune is >>only sent on the next periodic Join(*,G) (see 4.4.6). >> >>Proposition: when 1st data packet arrives on SPT tree, send Prune(S,G,rpt) if >>RPF_interface(S) != RPF_interface(RP). >> >>Ha Nguyen >>University of Lausanne >> From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Mon Aug 28 10:45:42 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 KAA11213 for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 10:45:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id HAA98320 for pim-list; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 07:37:59 -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 HAA98315 for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 07:37:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from uldns1.unil.ch (uldns1.unil.ch [130.223.8.20]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id HAA29887 for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 07:37:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=uldns1.unil.ch) by uldns1.unil.ch with esmtp (Exim 3.14 #1) for pim@catarina.usc.edu id 13TQ2u-0003uD-00; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 16:37:56 +0200 Received: from pcvidy104a.unil.ch ([130.223.8.40]) by uldns1.unil.ch with smtp (Exim 3.14 #1) for pim@catarina.usc.edu id 13TQ2u-0003uB-00; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 16:37:56 +0200 Message-Id: <4.1.20000828163548.0093a410@pop-server.unil.ch> X-Sender: hnguyen@pop-server.unil.ch X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 16:38:52 +0200 To: pim@catarina.usc.edu From: Ha Nguyen Subject: SPT-bit during Register process Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Hello, I have a remark concerning the new draft-ietf-pim-sm-v2-new-00.ps about the SPT-bit during the Register process. This bit must be set to "1" when the RP receives the 1st data packet on the SPT tree. The Update_SPTbit procedure (see page 15) contains a line that should carry this action ( RPF_interface(S) != RPF_interface(RP)). But the definition of RPF_interface(RP) at the RP is "the virtual interface on which register packets are received" (see page 13): so we have RPF_interface(S)= RPF_interface(RP) and SPT-bit will not be set to "1". Best regards, Ha Nguyen University of Lausanne From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Mon Aug 28 11:43:58 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 LAA13406 for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 11:43:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id IAA98742 for pim-list; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 08:36:27 -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 IAA98737 for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 08:36:26 -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 IAA25053 for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 08:36:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kouvelas-u10.cisco.com (kouvelas-u10.cisco.com [171.69.65.54]) by sj-msg-core-1.cisco.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA26134; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 08:32:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (kouvelas@localhost) by kouvelas-u10.cisco.com (8.8.8-Cisco List Logging/CISCO.WS.1.2) with ESMTP id IAA03391; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 08:32:11 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200008281532.IAA03391@kouvelas-u10.cisco.com> X-Authentication-Warning: kouvelas-u10.cisco.com: kouvelas owned process doing -bs To: Ha Nguyen cc: Isidor Kouvelas , pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Re: Prune(S,G,rpt) is not sent immediately during SPT switchover Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 08:32:11 -0700 From: Isidor Kouvelas Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk The latest spec can be found at: http://www.aciri.org/mjh/pimspec.ps thanks I Ha Nguyen writes: >I wonder if I have an up-to-date draft (draft-ietf-pim-sm-v2-new-00.ps). >Anyway, in this draft, on page 30 PruneDesired is defined as follow: >bool PruneDesired(S,G,rpt) { > return (JoinDesired(*,G) AND inherited_olist(S,G,rpt)= = NULL) >} > >So setting SPT-bit does not influence PruneDesired. > >Best regards > >At 10:46 25.08.00 -0700, you wrote: >> >>Spec already includes this logic. >>- Router A is receiving packets from the source on the shared tree >>- Router A decides to switch to the SPT and hence update the KAT(S,G) >>- This causes JoinDesired(S,G) to become true and an (S,G) Join is >> triggered >>- When the first packet arrives on the shortest path, A will receive >> it on the RPF interface towards the source and because >> JoinDesired(S,G) is true it will set the SPT bit. >>- Setting the SPT bit will cause PruneDesired(S,G,rpt) to become true >> and the upstream (S,G,rpt) JP state machine to transition from >> not pruned to pruned state thus triggering an (S,G,rpt)Prune. >> >>thanks >>I >> >>Ha Nguyen writes: >>>Hello, >>> >>>toward S ------A------ toward RP >>> ¦ >>> receiver r(*,G) >>> >>>When draft-ietf-pim-sm-v2-new-00.ps is applied to the above configuration >>>during SPT switchover, router A does not send immediately Prune(S,G,rpt) >towar >>>d >>>RP when it receives the 1st data packet from S on the SPT tree. This prune i >s >>>only sent on the next periodic Join(*,G) (see 4.4.6). >>> >>>Proposition: when 1st data packet arrives on SPT tree, send Prune(S,G,rpt) i >f >>>RPF_interface(S) != RPF_interface(RP). >>> >>>Ha Nguyen >>>University of Lausanne >>> > From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Mon Aug 28 13:55:16 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 NAA17040 for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 13:55:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA99846 for pim-list; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 10:48:03 -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 KAA99841 for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 10:48:02 -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 KAA17293 for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 10:48:03 -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 90EFC1E015; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 13:46:01 -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 NAA19509; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 13:46:01 -0400 (EDT) From: Bill Fenner Received: (from fenner@localhost) by windsor.research.att.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.5) id KAA09671; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 10:46:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200008281746.KAA09671@windsor.research.att.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII To: pusateri@juniper.net Subject: Re: Whereabouts of the PIM-DM draft Cc: cvn065@lmpsil02.comm.mot.com, pim@catarina.usc.edu, pusateri@juniper.net Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 10:45:59 -0700 Versions: dmail (solaris) 2.2g/makemail 2.9a Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk I put a copy of draft-ietf-pim-v2-dm-03.txt at http://www.research.att.com/~fenner/mcast/pim/dm/ . This is the most recently published PIM WG I-D; published June 1999. I also stuck the State-Refresh document there too, since it's also expired. Bill From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Tue Aug 29 03:59:39 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 DAA11196 for ; Tue, 29 Aug 2000 03:59:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id AAA03061 for pim-list; Tue, 29 Aug 2000 00:13:19 -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 AAA03056 for ; Tue, 29 Aug 2000 00:13:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from uldns1.unil.ch (uldns1.unil.ch [130.223.8.20]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id AAA26110 for ; Tue, 29 Aug 2000 00:13:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=uldns1.unil.ch) by uldns1.unil.ch with esmtp (Exim 3.14 #1) for pim@catarina.usc.edu id 13TfVL-0000AK-00; Tue, 29 Aug 2000 09:08:19 +0200 Received: from pcvidy104a.unil.ch ([130.223.8.40]) by uldns1.unil.ch with smtp (Exim 3.14 #1) for pim@catarina.usc.edu id 13TfVL-0000AI-00; Tue, 29 Aug 2000 09:08:19 +0200 Message-Id: <4.1.20000829085852.0093fdd0@pop-server.unil.ch> X-Sender: hnguyen@pop-server.unil.ch X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 09:08:41 +0200 To: pim@catarina.usc.edu From: Ha Nguyen Subject: To Join or not during Register procedure Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Hello, On draft-ietf-pim-sm-v2-new-unpublished-2000727, it seems that there exists some contradiction between 4.3.3 and Upstream (S,G) state-machine (see figure 6). 4.3.3 states that Join(S,G) is optional. But when RP receives a Register message (see pseudocode on page 22), it restarts KeepaliveTimer(S,G). So JoinDesired(S,G) ->TRUE and Upstream(S,G)->"Joined" and RP sends Join(S,G) toward S. Ha Nguyen University of Lausanne From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Tue Aug 29 12:58:34 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 MAA25840 for ; Tue, 29 Aug 2000 12:58:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA05106 for pim-list; Tue, 29 Aug 2000 09:48:45 -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 JAA05101 for ; Tue, 29 Aug 2000 09:48:44 -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 JAA18184 for ; Tue, 29 Aug 2000 09:48:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kouvelas-u10.cisco.com (kouvelas-u10.cisco.com [171.69.65.54]) by sj-msg-core-1.cisco.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA14911; Tue, 29 Aug 2000 09:44:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (kouvelas@localhost) by kouvelas-u10.cisco.com (8.8.8-Cisco List Logging/CISCO.WS.1.2) with ESMTP id JAA05459; Tue, 29 Aug 2000 09:44:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200008291644.JAA05459@kouvelas-u10.cisco.com> X-Authentication-Warning: kouvelas-u10.cisco.com: kouvelas owned process doing -bs To: Ha Nguyen cc: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Re: To Join or not during Register procedure Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 09:44:25 -0700 From: Isidor Kouvelas Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk We are aware that the description of switching to the SPT on anything but the first packet is missing. This was also discussed in the Pittsburgh IETF. It will be included in the next published version of the draft. thanks I Ha Nguyen writes: >Hello, >On draft-ietf-pim-sm-v2-new-unpublished-2000727, it seems that there exists >some >contradiction between 4.3.3 and Upstream (S,G) state-machine (see figure 6). >4.3.3 states that Join(S,G) is optional. But when RP receives a Register >message (see pseudocode on page 22), it restarts KeepaliveTimer(S,G). So >JoinDesired(S,G) ->TRUE and Upstream(S,G)->"Joined" and RP sends Join(S,G) >toward S. > >Ha Nguyen >University of Lausanne From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Tue Aug 29 17:43:12 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 RAA01418 for ; Tue, 29 Aug 2000 17:43:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA06735 for pim-list; Tue, 29 Aug 2000 14:33:17 -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 OAA06730 for ; Tue, 29 Aug 2000 14:33:16 -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 OAA23935 for ; Tue, 29 Aug 2000 14:33:10 -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 OAA04667 for ; Tue, 29 Aug 2000 14:30:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from root@localhost) by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com (8.11.0/8.11.0-DARKSTAR) id e7TLUka04173 for ; Tue, 29 Aug 2000 14:30:46 -0700 Message-Id: <200008292130.e7TLUka04173@darkstar.iprg.nokia.com> X-Virus-Scanned: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 14:30:46 -0700 Nokia Silicon Valley Email Exploit Scanner Received: from agni.iprg.nokia.com (205.226.8.100) by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com(WTS.12.69) smtpdhR2Uji; Tue, 29 Aug 2000 14:30:38 PDT To: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: (S,G,rpt) asserts MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <19581.967584656.1@iprg.nokia.com> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 14:30:56 -0700 From: Ravi Puvvala Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk If a router has (*,G) and (S,G,rpt) state and if we receive a preferred assert with the RPT bit set. There were few matching rules that were specified in the old draft when an assert is received, the new spec does not mention anything. I assume we match both (*,G) and (S,G) assert state machines. According to the assert section state machine in Section 4.5, (S,G,rpt) assert state is not changed because CouldAssert(S,G,I) will be false? This does not seem correct. CouldAssert(S,G,I) = SPTbit(S,G)==TRUE AND ........ Ravi From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Wed Aug 30 10:11:34 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 KAA00073 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 10:11:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id GAA11144 for pim-list; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 06:57:14 -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 GAA11139 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 06:57:02 -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 GAA19508 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 06:57:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by exchange01.iirltd.co.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 14:54:55 +0100 Message-ID: From: Rohan Marwaha To: "'pim@catarina.usc.edu'" Subject: MPLS Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 14:54:54 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk I thought you might be interested to know that the MPLS conference in London this September is booking very well with 50 delegates so far and the pre-conference workshop nearly fully booked. Check out the website for further details: www.iir-conferences.com/mpls Regards, Rohan Marwaha Telecoms & Technology Marketing Fax: +44 (0) 20 7915 5001 email: rmarwaha@iir-conferences.com http://www.iir-conferences.com ___________________________________ Sent by MailKing - email merge for Windows Editor's Pick, ZDNet "FREE download at http://www.mailking.com" From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Wed Aug 30 12:23:51 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 MAA03721 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 12:23:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA11842 for pim-list; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 09:09:58 -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 JAA11837 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 09:09:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay1.nw.smtp.psi.net (relay1.nw.smtp.psi.net [38.9.154.2]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id JAA25674 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 09:09:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [204.242.142.104] (helo=bena) by relay1.nw.smtp.psi.net with smtp (Exim 3.13 #3) id 13UANl-0005z1-00 for pim@catarina.usc.edu; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 12:06:33 -0400 Message-ID: <006601c0129c$c62b52a0$8b01020a@ipoptical.com> From: "ben abarbanel" To: Subject: Scallability Question Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 12:10:10 -0400 Organization: IPOptical MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0063_01C0127B.3E7B01A0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0063_01C0127B.3E7B01A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I am trying to size up the Multicast routing tree, and was wondering if = there was a study done on the numer of maximum multicast groups or trees that a router could = see in its forwarding tables. Any information or pointers to documents would be appreciated. Regards, Ben Ben Abarbanel, Software Engineering, =20 Phone: 703 456 2982 FAX: 703 456 2952 IPOptical, Inc. 11480 Sunset Hills Road Suite #200E Reston, VA 20190 ------=_NextPart_000_0063_01C0127B.3E7B01A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I am trying to size up the Multicast = routing tree,=20 and was wondering if there was a study done
on the numer of maximum multicast = groups or trees=20 that a router could see in its forwarding tables.
 
Any information or pointers to = documents would be=20 appreciated.
 
Regards,
Ben
 
Ben Abarbanel,  Software = Engineering, =20
 
Phone:  703 456=20 2982
FAX:      703 456 2952
 
IPOptical, Inc.
11480 Sunset Hills = Road
Suite=20 #200E
Reston, VA 20190
------=_NextPart_000_0063_01C0127B.3E7B01A0-- From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Wed Aug 30 17:27:01 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 RAA09460 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 17:27:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA14073 for pim-list; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 14:18:04 -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 OAA14068 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 14:18:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from motgate2.mot.com (motgate2.mot.com [136.182.1.10]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id OAA20550 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 14:18:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: [from pobox.mot.com (pobox.mot.com [129.188.137.100]) by motgate2.mot.com (motgate2 2.1) with ESMTP id OAA02656 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 14:17:02 -0700 (MST)] Received: [from s-il02-e.comm.mot.com (s-il02-e.comm.mot.com [145.1.204.15]) by pobox.mot.com (MOT-pobox 2.0) with ESMTP id OAA15794 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 14:17:01 -0700 (MST)] Received: by s-il02-e.comm.mot.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 16:17:01 -0500 Message-ID: <01FAF65DEA16D4119B95009027E78F3149D83C@il02exm26.comm.mot.com> From: Narayanan Vidya-CVN065 To: "'pim'" Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 16:17:00 -0500 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, Given that GenID is to be enabled on a per-interface basis, I have some questions on the working of GenID with PIM-SM that some of you may be able to answer. Consider the following configuration for the discussion: More PIM Routers ----- R1 ----- R2 ----- R3 ----- R4 ----- More PIM Routers | | Snd Rcv All the links between the routers are WAN links. Also, please note that all these questions are based on the assumption that GenID is enabled on a per-interface basis and also that when an interface goes down and up, a new GenID is triggered. 1. If an interface, say between R2 and R3 goes down and comes back up, both R2 and R3 would now send PIM Hellos with new GenIDs on that interface. The concept of GenID from what I understand is that if a router comes up after a failure and triggers a new GenID, its neighbor would send it all the RP-Set information and relevant Join/Prune messages. In this case, Would R2 and R3 both send RP-Set information (BSR Message) to each other? Also, this BSR message should be unicast (last paragraph in section 4.7.2 in revised version of PIM-SM spec?), correct? Normally, would R2 or R3, in this case, continue to propogate this BSR message on other interfaces? I would assume not, but please clarify. 2. Assume R3 is the RP for a group for which we have the sender and receiver as shown. If we are running on a shared tree (i.e., receiving DR never switches to shortest path tree for administrative reasons), R4 would not have any (S, G) state at all. If R3 (RP) reboots, how does the (S, G) state get re-created in it? As long as the other routers have not timed out this RP, the native multicast packets (assume past encapsulation stage) would be sent to R3 from R2 once it is up again. At this time, it would have (*, G) state, since R4 would have sent a (*, G) Join to it on seeing the GenID change. Now, would the RP forward the incoming packets based on the (*, G) entry? Or, does it drop the packets since there is no (S, G) entry for that source? Also, does an (S, G) entry get created again? And, how? If R1 sends a NULL register message prior to the expiration of its Register Suppression Timer, how does the RP react to that in this case? 3. Assume that R3 is also the E-BSR (Elected BSR). Let us say that there are other C-RPs in the network not shown in the picture above, beyond R1 and R4 on either side. Also assume that the R3 is the only C-BSR in the network. Now, if the link between R2 and R3 goes down, R1 and R2 just lost connectivity to the BSR. However, they are never going to time out the RPs. If the link stays down long enough, R3 would time out all the C-RPs that it used to reach through R2. If the link comes back up after that, R2 and R3 are going to unicast BSR messages to each other through GenID changes. Now, the BSR message from R3 to R2 would only have a partial set of C-RPs listed. But the message from R2 to R3 would have all the RPs listed. First of all, how does a BSR react to getting a BSR message from a neighbor with its own address as the BSR address? Second, what is the impact of this having different information being exchanged going to be on the network? I understand that the next periodic updates and C-RP advertisements should clean this up, but then, what is GenID buying here? 4. Now, adding another dimension to the problem, assume that R1 is also a C-BSR, but R3 is the E-BSR. Again, if the link between R2 and R3 fails and stays down long, R1 will elect itself as the BSR on one side. In this picture then, R1 and R2 now have knowledge of all the C-RPs on one half of the network, while, R3 and R4 have knowledge of C-RPs on the other side. When the link comes back up and BSR messages get exchanged due to GenID changes, how does the mess get resolved? Assuming that the GenID-triggered BSR message exchange is not sent to other routers, would there then be two E-BSRs in the network, until the next periodic update that triggers the BSR election process? I would greatly appreciate any comments on these questions. Thanks, Vidya From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Wed Aug 30 17:30:57 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 RAA09497 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 17:30:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA14119 for pim-list; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 14:23:03 -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 OAA14110 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 14:23:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from motgate2.mot.com (motgate2.mot.com [136.182.1.10]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id OAA24119 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 14:23:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: [from pobox.mot.com (pobox.mot.com [129.188.137.100]) by motgate2.mot.com (motgate2 2.1) with ESMTP id OAA07772 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 14:22:00 -0700 (MST)] Received: [from il02exi01.comm.mot.com (il02exi01.comm.mot.com [145.1.204.40]) by pobox.mot.com (MOT-pobox 2.0) with ESMTP id OAA20355 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 14:21:59 -0700 (MST)] Received: by il02exi01.comm.mot.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 16:21:59 -0500 Message-ID: <01FAF65DEA16D4119B95009027E78F3149D83D@il02exm26.comm.mot.com> From: Narayanan Vidya-CVN065 To: "'pim'" Subject: Questions on operation of GenID with PIM-SM Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 16:21:59 -0500 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, Given that GenID is to be enabled on a per-interface basis, I have some questions on the working of GenID with PIM-SM that some of you may be able to answer. Consider the following configuration for the discussion: More PIM Routers ----- R1 ----- R2 ----- R3 ----- R4 ----- More PIM Routers | | Snd Rcv All the links between the routers are WAN links. Also, please note that all these questions are based on the assumption that GenID is enabled on a per-interface basis and also that when an interface goes down and up, a new GenID is triggered. 1. If an interface, say between R2 and R3 goes down and comes back up, both R2 and R3 would now send PIM Hellos with new GenIDs on that interface. The concept of GenID from what I understand is that if a router comes up after a failure and triggers a new GenID, its neighbor would send it all the RP-Set information and relevant Join/Prune messages. In this case, Would R2 and R3 both send RP-Set information (BSR Message) to each other? Also, this BSR message should be unicast (last paragraph in section 4.7.2 in revised version of PIM-SM spec?), correct? Normally, would R2 or R3, in this case, continue to propogate this BSR message on other interfaces? I would assume not, but please clarify. 2. Assume R3 is the RP for a group for which we have the sender and receiver as shown. If we are running on a shared tree (i.e., receiving DR never switches to shortest path tree for administrative reasons), R4 would not have any (S, G) state at all. If R3 (RP) reboots, how does the (S, G) state get re-created in it? As long as the other routers have not timed out this RP, the native multicast packets (assume past encapsulation stage) would be sent to R3 from R2 once it is up again. At this time, it would have (*, G) state, since R4 would have sent a (*, G) Join to it on seeing the GenID change. Now, would the RP forward the incoming packets based on the (*, G) entry? Or, does it drop the packets since there is no (S, G) entry for that source? Also, does an (S, G) entry get created again? And, how? If R1 sends a NULL register message prior to the expiration of its Register Suppression Timer, how does the RP react to that in this case? 3. Assume that R3 is also the E-BSR (Elected BSR). Let us say that there are other C-RPs in the network not shown in the picture above, beyond R1 and R4 on either side. Also assume that the R3 is the only C-BSR in the network. Now, if the link between R2 and R3 goes down, R1 and R2 just lost connectivity to the BSR. However, they are never going to time out the RPs. If the link stays down long enough, R3 would time out all the C-RPs that it used to reach through R2. If the link comes back up after that, R2 and R3 are going to unicast BSR messages to each other through GenID changes. Now, the BSR message from R3 to R2 would only have a partial set of C-RPs listed. But the message from R2 to R3 would have all the RPs listed. First of all, how does a BSR react to getting a BSR message from a neighbor with its own address as the BSR address? Second, what is the impact of this having different information being exchanged going to be on the network? I understand that the next periodic updates and C-RP advertisements should clean this up, but then, what is GenID buying here? 4. Now, adding another dimension to the problem, assume that R1 is also a C-BSR, but R3 is the E-BSR. Again, if the link between R2 and R3 fails and stays down long, R1 will elect itself as the BSR on one side. In this picture then, R1 and R2 now have knowledge of all the C-RPs on one half of the network, while, R3 and R4 have knowledge of C-RPs on the other side. When the link comes back up and BSR messages get exchanged due to GenID changes, how does the mess get resolved? Assuming that the GenID-triggered BSR message exchange is not sent to other routers, would there then be two E-BSRs in the network, until the next periodic update that triggers the BSR election process? I would greatly appreciate any comments on these questions. Thanks, Vidya From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Thu Aug 31 20:28:26 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 UAA14580 for ; Thu, 31 Aug 2000 20:28:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA20276 for pim-list; Thu, 31 Aug 2000 16:52:55 -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 QAA20271 for ; Thu, 31 Aug 2000 16:52:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from labsun2.iss.comsat.com (labsun2.iss.comsat.com [134.133.12.62]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id QAA10482 for ; Thu, 31 Aug 2000 16:52:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from castor.ntd.comsat.com (castor.ntd.comsat.com [134.133.80.100]) by labsun2.iss.comsat.com (8.10.2/8.10.2) with ESMTP id e7VM1Xe21932 for ; Thu, 31 Aug 2000 18:01:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from punn (punn.ntd.comsat.com [134.133.79.242]) by castor.ntd.comsat.com (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id e7VM1MP14777 for ; Thu, 31 Aug 2000 18:01:32 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <02ab01c01397$b905d310$f24f8586@ntd.comsat.com> From: "karim Zamani" To: "'pim'" References: <01FAF65DEA16D4119B95009027E78F3149D83D@il02exm26.comm.mot.com> Subject: RP on a stick problem Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 18:06:22 -0400 Organization: Comsat Corp. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, I run through some CISCO documents about the particular case of "RP on a stick". CISCO proposes solutions to this problem (atomic joins etc). Is there any plans to incorporate that into PIM-SM spec? Should PIM-SM implementations take that into consideration? Thanks, Karim Zamani. From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Thu Aug 31 20:53:43 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 UAA14870 for ; Thu, 31 Aug 2000 20:53:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id RAA20928 for pim-list; Thu, 31 Aug 2000 17:46:01 -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 RAA20923 for ; Thu, 31 Aug 2000 17:45:59 -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 RAA17282 for ; Thu, 31 Aug 2000 17:45:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kouvelas-u10.cisco.com (kouvelas-u10.cisco.com [171.69.65.54]) by sj-msg-core-2.cisco.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA08170; Thu, 31 Aug 2000 17:42:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (kouvelas@localhost) by kouvelas-u10.cisco.com (8.8.8-Cisco List Logging/CISCO.WS.1.2) with ESMTP id RAA07998; Thu, 31 Aug 2000 17:41:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200009010041.RAA07998@kouvelas-u10.cisco.com> X-Authentication-Warning: kouvelas-u10.cisco.com: kouvelas owned process doing -bs To: "karim Zamani" cc: "'pim'" Subject: Re: RP on a stick problem Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 17:41:44 -0700 From: Isidor Kouvelas Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk "karim Zamani" writes: >Hi, > >I run through some CISCO documents about the particular case of "RP on a >stick". CISCO proposes solutions to this problem (atomic joins etc). >Is there any plans to incorporate that into PIM-SM spec? > >Should PIM-SM implementations take that into consideration? The new PIM spec already considers the RP-on-a-stick turnaround router case. On the turnaround router, in steady state the immediate (S,G) olist is NULL but the inherited (S,G) olist is non NULL. JoinDesired(S,G) becomes TRUE on the turnaround router when the RP first joines towards the source (although in steady state the RP no longer joines). Data packets arriving on the (S,G) RPF interface of the turnaround router update the KAT which in combination with the inherited (S,G) olist being non-null keep JoinDesired(S,G) being true. Hence the turnaround router keeps joining towards the source. This pulls the traffic on the turnaround LAN. thanks Isidor