From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Fri Sep 1 20:19:34 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 UAA23260 for ; Fri, 1 Sep 2000 20:19:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id RAA26099 for pim-list; Fri, 1 Sep 2000 17:09:14 -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 RAA26094 for ; Fri, 1 Sep 2000 17:09:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-blue.research.att.com (mail-blue.research.att.com [135.207.30.102]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id RAA01837 for ; Fri, 1 Sep 2000 17:09:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alliance.research.att.com (alliance.research.att.com [135.207.26.26]) by mail-blue.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4596E4CE4A for ; Fri, 1 Sep 2000 20:06:33 -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 UAA21394 for ; Fri, 1 Sep 2000 20:06:32 -0400 (EDT) From: Bill Fenner Received: (from fenner@localhost) by windsor.research.att.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.5) id RAA18365; Fri, 1 Sep 2000 17:06:31 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200009020006.RAA18365@windsor.research.att.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII To: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Implementors: format used for null Registers? Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 17:06:31 -0700 Versions: dmail (solaris) 2.2g/makemail 2.9a Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk I'd like to hear from implementors what format they use for null Registers. The current spec says "the Multicast data packet portion contains only a dummy header with S as the source address, G as the destination address, and a data length of zero." In particular, what do you use for the first byte of the packet? Do you fill in the IP version? Do you fill it in with zero? Do you leave an arbitrary value? (I'm worried about IPv6 Null Registers, especially if there are implementations that leave the first byte as arbitrary data) Bill From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Fri Sep 1 21:14:00 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 VAA23763 for ; Fri, 1 Sep 2000 21:13:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA26504 for pim-list; Fri, 1 Sep 2000 18:04:56 -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] (may be forged)) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA26499 for ; Fri, 1 Sep 2000 18:04:55 -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 SAA27821 for ; Fri, 1 Sep 2000 18:04:52 -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 SAA19803 for ; Fri, 1 Sep 2000 18:02:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from root@localhost) by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com (8.11.0/8.11.0-DARKSTAR) id e8212cN01784 for ; Fri, 1 Sep 2000 18:02:38 -0700 Message-Id: <200009020102.e8212cN01784@darkstar.iprg.nokia.com> X-Virus-Scanned: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 18:02:38 -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) smtpdVBc1rG; Fri, 01 Sep 2000 18:02:34 PDT To: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Re: Implementors: format used for null Registers? In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 01 Sep 2000 17:06:31 PDT." <200009020006.RAA18365@windsor.research.att.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <39368.967856579.1@iprg.nokia.com> Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 18:02:59 -0700 From: Ravi Puvvala Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Bill Fenner writes: | I'd like to hear from implementors what format they use for null | Registers. The current spec says "the Multicast data packet portion | contains only a dummy header with S as the source address, G as the | destination address, and a data length of zero." | | In particular, what do you use for the first byte of the packet? Do you | fill in the IP version? Do you fill it in with zero? Do you leave an | arbitrary value? Fill in the IP version. | (I'm worried about IPv6 Null Registers, especially if there are | implementations that leave the first byte as arbitrary data) Ravi From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Fri Sep 1 21:26:16 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 VAA23869 for ; Fri, 1 Sep 2000 21:26:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA26600 for pim-list; Fri, 1 Sep 2000 18:17:20 -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 SAA26595; Fri, 1 Sep 2000 18:17:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rumi (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rumi.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA26064; Fri, 1 Sep 2000 18:17:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200009020117.SAA26064@rumi.usc.edu> To: Bill Fenner cc: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Re: Implementors: format used for null Registers? In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 01 Sep 2000 17:06:31 PDT." <200009020006.RAA18365@windsor.research.att.com> Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 18:17:18 -0700 From: Pavlin Ivanov Radoslavov Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk > I'd like to hear from implementors what format they use for null > Registers. The current spec says "the Multicast data packet portion > contains only a dummy header with S as the source address, G as the > destination address, and a data length of zero." > > In particular, what do you use for the first byte of the packet? Do you > fill in the IP version? Do you fill it in with zero? Do you leave an > arbitrary value? > > (I'm worried about IPv6 Null Registers, especially if there are > implementations that leave the first byte as arbitrary data) In pimd (IPv4) from USC the first octet is the the IP version (4) and the header length (20 >> 2). In pim6sd from KAME, the first octet is the IP version (6), and traffic class of 0 (please anyone from KAME correct me if some other parts of the code modifies it later). Below is the concrete code for the rest of the fields (in case it matters). Pavlin pimd: ip->ip_v = IPVERSION; ip->ip_hl = (sizeof(struct ip) >> 2); ip->ip_tos = 0; ip->ip_id = 0; ip->ip_off = 0; ip->ip_p = IPPROTO_UDP; /* XXX: bogus */ ip->ip_len = htons(sizeof(struct ip)); ip->ip_ttl = MINTTL; ip->ip_sum = 0; ip->ip_sum = inet_cksum((u_int16 *)ip, sizeof(struct ip)); pim6sd: ip->ip6_plen= 0; ip->ip6_flow=0; ip->ip6_vfc = 0x60; ip->ip6_hlim = MINHLIM; ip->ip6_nxt = IPPROTO_NONE; From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Mon Sep 4 12:39:13 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 MAA05168 for ; Mon, 4 Sep 2000 12:39:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA39057 for pim-list; Mon, 4 Sep 2000 09:25:03 -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] (may be forged)) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA39052 for ; Mon, 4 Sep 2000 09:25:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monsoon.mail.pipex.net (monsoon.mail.pipex.net [158.43.128.69]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with SMTP id JAA28767 for ; Mon, 4 Sep 2000 09:25:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 29129 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2000 16:20:59 -0000 Received: from userdt13.uk.uudial.com (HELO vaionote) (62.188.6.218) by smtp.dial.pipex.com with SMTP; 4 Sep 2000 16:20:59 -0000 Message-ID: <001c01c0168b$eb204640$c804bc3e@vaionote> Reply-To: "Tony Ballardie" From: "Tony Ballardie" To: Subject: PIM Asserts (DM) Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 17:14:28 +0100 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 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'm reading some Cisco documentation which says the Assert winner prunes the assert intf (assuming no group members), and the prune times out after 3 mins. It doesn't explicitly say a prune is also sent upstream, though the scenario shows it could (the familiar triangle of routers, 2 serving a LAN). I'm wondering if the assert winner doesn't send a prune upstream, why not? Also, why is the prune on the assert intf fixed at 3 mins? Aren't PIM prunes configurable? thanks Tony From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Tue Sep 5 23:50:11 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 XAA20917 for ; Tue, 5 Sep 2000 23:50:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id UAA46292 for pim-list; Tue, 5 Sep 2000 20:30:53 -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 UAA46286; Tue, 5 Sep 2000 20:30:51 -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 UAA25068; Tue, 5 Sep 2000 20:30:49 -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 MAA07031; Wed, 6 Sep 2000 12:16:19 +0900 (JST) Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 12:28:45 +0900 Message-ID: From: JINMEI Tatuya / =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCP0BMQEMjOkgbKEI=?= To: Pavlin Ivanov Radoslavov Cc: Bill Fenner , pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Re: Implementors: format used for null Registers? In-Reply-To: In your message of "Fri, 01 Sep 2000 18:17:18 -0700" <200009020117.SAA26064@rumi.usc.edu> References: <200009020006.RAA18365@windsor.research.att.com> <200009020117.SAA26064@rumi.usc.edu> 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: 38 Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk >>>>> On Fri, 01 Sep 2000 18:17:18 -0700, >>>>> Pavlin Ivanov Radoslavov said: >> I'd like to hear from implementors what format they use for null >> Registers. The current spec says "the Multicast data packet portion >> contains only a dummy header with S as the source address, G as the >> destination address, and a data length of zero." >> >> In particular, what do you use for the first byte of the packet? Do you >> fill in the IP version? Do you fill it in with zero? Do you leave an >> arbitrary value? >> >> (I'm worried about IPv6 Null Registers, especially if there are >> implementations that leave the first byte as arbitrary data) > In pimd (IPv4) from USC the first octet is the the IP version (4) > and the header length (20 >> 2). > In pim6sd from KAME, the first octet is the IP version (6), and > traffic class of 0 (please anyone from KAME correct me if > some other parts of the code modifies it later). You're 100% correct. Thanks for responding on behalf of KAME and sorry for my delayed response. I don't know what other implementations (e.g. mrtd) do this. I'm not sure about the exact concern of Bill, but since IPv6 PIM is meaningful only with IPv6 transport, we should restrict the inner header of an IPv6 PIM register message to an IPv6 (not v4) header, and vice versa. So it might be useful to clearly state that the version field of the inner IP header in register should be set properly and that if a mismatch is found on reception then the register should be discarded. JINMEI, Tatuya Communication Platform Lab. Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp. jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Wed Sep 6 07:55:56 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 HAA08868 for ; Wed, 6 Sep 2000 07:55:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id EAA48472 for pim-list; Wed, 6 Sep 2000 04:42:24 -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 EAA48467 for ; Wed, 6 Sep 2000 04:42:22 -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 EAA07280 for ; Wed, 6 Sep 2000 04:42:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zsc4c002.corpwest.baynetworks.com by ertpg14e1.nortelnetworks.com; Wed, 6 Sep 2000 07:33:34 -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 RX6JRQF4; Wed, 6 Sep 2000 04:33:31 -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 RJ677V9J; Wed, 6 Sep 2000 07:32:42 -0400 Message-ID: <39B62A14.25FB2015@nortelnetworks.com> Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 07:27:16 -0400 X-Sybari-Space: 00000000 00000000 00000000 From: "Brian Haberman" Reply-To: "Brian Haberman" Organization: Nortel Networks X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win95; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Re: Implementors: format used for null Registers? References: <200009020006.RAA18365@windsor.research.att.com> <200009020117.SAA26064@rumi.usc.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit JINMEI Tatuya / $B?@L@C#:H(B wrote: > ...snip... > I'm not sure about the exact concern of Bill, but since IPv6 PIM is > meaningful only with IPv6 transport, we should restrict the inner > header of an IPv6 PIM register message to an IPv6 (not v4) header, and > vice versa. So it might be useful to clearly state that the version > field of the inner IP header in register should be set properly and > that if a mismatch is found on reception then the register should be > discarded. That seems like a reasonable approach. I can incorporate that into the PIM for IPv6 draft. Regards, Brian -- Brian Haberman Nortel Networks haberman@nortelnetworks.com From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Sun Sep 10 03:36:27 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id DAA03954 for ; Sun, 10 Sep 2000 03:36:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id AAA88567 for pim-list; Sun, 10 Sep 2000 00:19:47 -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 AAA88562 for ; Sun, 10 Sep 2000 00:19:45 -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 AAA11112 for ; Sun, 10 Sep 2000 00:19:44 -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 QAA25651; Sun, 10 Sep 2000 16:05:44 +0900 (JST) Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 16:17:52 +0900 Message-ID: From: JINMEI Tatuya / =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCP0BMQEMjOkgbKEI=?= To: Brian Haberman Cc: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Re: Implementors: format used for null Registers? In-Reply-To: In your message of "Wed, 06 Sep 2000 07:27:16 -0400" <39B62A14.25FB2015@nortelnetworks.com> References: <200009020006.RAA18365@windsor.research.att.com> <200009020117.SAA26064@rumi.usc.edu> <39B62A14.25FB2015@nortelnetworks.com> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.3.0 (Roam) Emacs/20.7 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: 20 Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk >>>>> On Wed, 06 Sep 2000 07:27:16 -0400, >>>>> "Brian Haberman" said: >> I'm not sure about the exact concern of Bill, but since IPv6 PIM is >> meaningful only with IPv6 transport, we should restrict the inner >> header of an IPv6 PIM register message to an IPv6 (not v4) header, and >> vice versa. So it might be useful to clearly state that the version >> field of the inner IP header in register should be set properly and >> that if a mismatch is found on reception then the register should be >> discarded. > That seems like a reasonable approach. I can incorporate that into > the PIM for IPv6 draft. FYI: I've implemented this in the KAME's implementation. JINMEI, Tatuya Communication Platform Lab. Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp. jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Wed Sep 13 07:35:10 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id HAA05036 for ; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 07:35:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id EAA07837 for pim-list; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 04:07:40 -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 EAA07832 for ; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 04:07:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp2.cluster.oleane.net (smtp2.cluster.oleane.net [195.25.12.17]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id EAA08492 for ; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 04:07:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from oleane (dyn-1-1-110.Vin.dialup.oleane.fr [195.25.4.110]) by smtp2.cluster.oleane.net with SMTP id NAA39043 for ; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 13:09:40 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <016101c01d72$64d17620$7501a8c0@oleane.oleane.com> From: "Peter Lewis" To: Subject: IP over DWDM 2000 International Conference, Paris 27-30 November, 2000 Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 13:04:31 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_015E_01C01D83.28204A60" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_015E_01C01D83.28204A60 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable This event aims at presenting an up-to-date state of the art in the = design of new Internet network architectures. It will be a unique = opportunity for researchers, network operators and service providers = from both the IP world and the optical networking world to discuss the = potentialities of all these promising perspectives.=20 http://www.upperside.fr/badwdm.htm ------=_NextPart_000_015E_01C01D83.28204A60 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
This event aims at presenting an up-to-date state of the art in the = design=20 of new Internet network architectures. It will be a unique opportunity = for=20 researchers, network operators and service providers from both the IP = world and=20 the optical networking world to discuss the potentialities of all these=20 promising perspectives.
 
http://www.upperside.fr/badwd= m.htm
------=_NextPart_000_015E_01C01D83.28204A60-- From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Wed Sep 13 17:24:48 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id RAA17816 for ; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 17:24:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA10928 for pim-list; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 14:01:41 -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] (may be forged)) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA10923 for ; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 14:01:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from motgate.mot.com (motgate.mot.com [129.188.136.100]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id OAA29944 for ; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 14:01:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: [from pobox2.mot.com (pobox2.mot.com [136.182.15.8]) by motgate.mot.com (motgate 2.1) with ESMTP id OAA08071 for ; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 14:00:36 -0700 (MST)] Received: [from s-il02-d.comm.mot.com (s-il02-d.comm.mot.com [145.1.204.14]) by pobox2.mot.com (MOT-pobox2 2.0) with ESMTP id OAA04430 for ; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 14:00:36 -0700 (MST)] Received: by s-il02-d.comm.mot.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 16:00:36 -0500 Message-ID: <01FAF65DEA16D4119B95009027E78F3149D84E@il02exm26.comm.mot.com> From: Narayanan Vidya-CVN065 To: "'Yunzhou Li'" Cc: "'pim'" Subject: Question on GenID Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 16:00:35 -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, I had sent this out on the PIM mailing list a couple of weeks back, but got no response. I am trying to understand the way GenID works in these cases. If you can please clarify some of these questions, I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks, Vidya ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------- Hi, A basic question on GenID operation - is a rebooted router expected to send any BSR message (say, if it is itself a C-BSR) on getting a hello from a neighbor? 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 Mon Sep 18 11:08:42 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id LAA10788 for ; Mon, 18 Sep 2000 11:08:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id HAA49193 for pim-list; Mon, 18 Sep 2000 07:49:36 -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 HAA49188 for ; Mon, 18 Sep 2000 07:49:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from showboat.teradyne.com (showboat.teradyne.com [198.51.251.10]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id HAA07999 for ; Mon, 18 Sep 2000 07:49:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from chorus.teradyne.com (chorus.teradyne.com [131.101.1.195]) by showboat.teradyne.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id KAA11451 for ; Mon, 18 Sep 2000 10:43:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from notes.teradyne.com (jaypeak.corp.teradyne.com [131.101.17.23]) by chorus.teradyne.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.7.1) with SMTP id KAA22364 for ; Mon, 18 Sep 2000 10:46:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: by notes.teradyne.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.3 (733.2 10-16-1998)) id 8525695E.00512541 ; Mon, 18 Sep 2000 10:46:19 -0400 X-Lotus-FromDomain: TERADYNE From: "Yahya Abd Rahman" To: pim@catarina.usc.edu Message-ID: <8525695E.0051229A.00@notes.teradyne.com> Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 10:45:56 -0400 Subject: BOOTSTRAP Message, Multicast or Unicast? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Hi, I was wondering whether somebody could clarify this two statement to me. Section 3.6.2 page 32 A DR Unicasts bootstrap message to each new PIM neighbor Section 4.6 page 50 The Bootstrap message are multicast to 'ALL-PIM-ROUTERS' group out all interfaces having PIM neighbors. Thanks From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Mon Sep 18 13:32:41 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id NAA15568 for ; Mon, 18 Sep 2000 13:32:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA50334 for pim-list; Mon, 18 Sep 2000 10:09:15 -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 KAA50329 for ; Mon, 18 Sep 2000 10:09:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.routerware.com (mail.routerware.com [204.31.186.3]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id KAA29890 for ; Mon, 18 Sep 2000 10:09:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by NEWMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Mon, 18 Sep 2000 10:07:39 -0700 Message-ID: <4F48C7B31A8BD311B1D20090279C34B230A2A7@clavin> From: Chris Hall To: "'Yahya Abd Rahman'" , pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: RE: BOOTSTRAP Message, Multicast or Unicast? Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 10:07:44 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk I believe the periodic bootstrap message is multicast out every enabled PIM interface, but a new PIM neighbor is unicasted a bootstrap message to get it up to speed faster. Chris Hall *********************************************************** Opinions expressed herein are not those of my employer. -----Original Message----- From: Yahya Abd Rahman [mailto:Yahya_Abd_Rahman@notes.teradyne.com] Sent: Monday, September 18, 2000 7:46 AM To: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: BOOTSTRAP Message, Multicast or Unicast? Hi, I was wondering whether somebody could clarify this two statement to me. Section 3.6.2 page 32 A DR Unicasts bootstrap message to each new PIM neighbor Section 4.6 page 50 The Bootstrap message are multicast to 'ALL-PIM-ROUTERS' group out all interfaces having PIM neighbors. Thanks From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Wed Sep 20 14:54:47 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id OAA02037 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 14:54:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA72332 for pim-list; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 11:24:56 -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] (may be forged)) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA72326 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 11:24:55 -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 LAA25503 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 11:24:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zsc4c000.corpwest.baynetworks.com by ertpg14e1.nortelnetworks.com; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 14:16:10 -0400 Received: by zsc4c000.corpwest.baynetworks.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2652.35) id ; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 11:12:56 -0700 Message-ID: <5D630265EF50D311ABB60008C7917DB60135DC83@zsc4c004.corpwest.baynetworks.com> From: "Vaishali Pandya" To: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Adding back pruned oifs Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 11:12:54 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2652.35) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C0232E.656E5050" Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0232E.656E5050 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Hi, Can somebody explains how the following configuration will work? Snd-----R1-------R2--------R3-------Rcvr (RP) If the Snd is sending data and the Rcvr goes away then each router will have following entries: R1- S,G with null oif R3- No, S,G Entry Now, if the Rcvr joins again, how does R1 recalculate oifs and start forwarding data? -Vaishali ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0232E.656E5050 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Adding back pruned oifs

Hi,
 Can somebody explains how the = following configuration will work?

         &nb= sp;           &nb= sp;           &nb= sp;  Snd-----R1-------R2--------R3-------Rcvr
         &nb= sp;           &nb= sp;           &nb= sp;           &nb= sp;           &nb= sp;           = (RP)
If the Snd is sending data and the = Rcvr goes away then each router will have following entries:

R1- S,G with null oif

R3- No, S,G Entry

Now, if the Rcvr joins again, how does = R1 recalculate oifs and start forwarding data?


-Vaishali

------_=_NextPart_001_01C0232E.656E5050-- From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Wed Sep 20 16:07:00 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id QAA05323 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 16:06:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA73264 for pim-list; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 12:51:53 -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 MAA73259 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 12:51:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-blue.research.att.com (mail-blue.research.att.com [135.207.30.102]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id MAA17527 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 12:51:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alliance.research.att.com (alliance.research.att.com [135.207.26.26]) by mail-blue.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 992F44CE24; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 15:49:39 -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 PAA12266; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 15:49:38 -0400 (EDT) From: Bill Fenner Received: (from fenner@localhost) by windsor.research.att.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.5) id MAA11731; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 12:49:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200009201949.MAA11731@windsor.research.att.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII To: vpandya@nortelnetworks.com Subject: Re: Adding back pruned oifs Cc: pim@catarina.usc.edu Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 12:49:37 -0700 Versions: dmail (solaris) 2.2g/makemail 2.9a Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk > Snd-----R1-------R2--------R3-------Rcvr > (RP) I'm not sure where the RP is meant to be; I'll guess R2. Make sure you use a constant-width font when you draw ASCII art, or it will look different on different displays. >If the Snd is sending data and the Rcvr goes away then each router will have >following entries: > >R1- S,G with null oif > >R3- No, S,G Entry > >Now, if the Rcvr joins again, how does R1 recalculate oifs and start >forwarding data? The RP will have remembered that it sent a (S,G) prune for the sender, and when it gets the (*,G) Join from R3 because the receiver joined again, it will send an (S,G) Join towards R1. If the RP weren't in the middle of the path, data would flow down the (*,G) tree until R3 decided to switch to the shortest path tree; since the RP is in the middle these paths are the same. Bill From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Wed Sep 20 16:44:12 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id QAA06535 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 16:44:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA73769 for pim-list; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 13:27:30 -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 NAA73764 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 13:27:29 -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 NAA29557 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 13:27:28 -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 334771E006; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 16:24:58 -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 QAA13346; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 16:24:44 -0400 (EDT) From: Bill Fenner Received: (from fenner@localhost) by windsor.research.att.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.5) id NAA12163; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 13:24:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200009202024.NAA12163@windsor.research.att.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII To: vpandya@nortelnetworks.com Subject: RE: Adding back pruned oifs Cc: pim@catarina.usc.edu Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 13:24:42 -0700 Versions: dmail (solaris) 2.2g/makemail 2.9a Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk >RP is at R3. So, How join towards S will go out? If R3 is the RP, then your picture of the initial state is incorrect: >R3- No, S,G Entry The RP must remember any sources that it sent a prune towards, if it doesn't want to cause large join latency. If it fails to keep this state, it will have to wait for R1 to send it a Null-Register which will remind it of the presence of the source, which could be as long as 60 seconds. Bill From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Wed Sep 20 16:51:33 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id QAA07323 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 16:51:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA73730 for pim-list; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 13:25:29 -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 NAA73725 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 13:25:28 -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 NAA26874 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 13:25:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zsc4c000.corpwest.baynetworks.com by ertpg14e1.nortelnetworks.com; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 16:16:41 -0400 Received: by zsc4c000.corpwest.baynetworks.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2652.35) id ; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 13:16:24 -0700 Message-ID: <5D630265EF50D311ABB60008C7917DB60135DC84@zsc4c004.corpwest.baynetworks.com> From: "Vaishali Pandya" To: "'Bill Fenner'" Cc: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: RE: Adding back pruned oifs Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 13:16:20 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2652.35) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C0233F.A40ED080" Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0233F.A40ED080 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" RP is at R3. So, How join towards S will go out? -----Original Message----- From: Bill Fenner [mailto:fenner@research.att.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 3:50 PM To: Pandya, Vaishali [SC7:370:EXCH] Cc: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Re: Adding back pruned oifs > Snd-----R1-------R2--------R3-------Rcvr > (RP) I'm not sure where the RP is meant to be; I'll guess R2. Make sure you use a constant-width font when you draw ASCII art, or it will look different on different displays. >If the Snd is sending data and the Rcvr goes away then each router will have >following entries: > >R1- S,G with null oif > >R3- No, S,G Entry > >Now, if the Rcvr joins again, how does R1 recalculate oifs and start >forwarding data? The RP will have remembered that it sent a (S,G) prune for the sender, and when it gets the (*,G) Join from R3 because the receiver joined again, it will send an (S,G) Join towards R1. If the RP weren't in the middle of the path, data would flow down the (*,G) tree until R3 decided to switch to the shortest path tree; since the RP is in the middle these paths are the same. Bill ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0233F.A40ED080 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable RE: Adding back pruned oifs

RP is at R3. So, How join towards S will go = out?

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Fenner [mailto:fenner@research.att.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 3:50 PM
To: Pandya, Vaishali [SC7:370:EXCH]
Cc: pim@catarina.usc.edu
Subject: Re: Adding back pruned oifs



>          = ;            = ;            = ;  Snd-----R1-------R2--------R3-------Rcvr
>          = ;            = ;            = ;            = ;            = ;           (RP) =

I'm not sure where the RP is meant to be; I'll guess = R2.  Make sure
you use a constant-width font when you draw ASCII = art, or it will look
different on different displays.

>If the Snd is sending data and the Rcvr goes away = then each router will have
>following entries: 
>
>R1- S,G with null oif 
>
>R3- No, S,G Entry 
>
>Now, if the Rcvr joins again, how does R1 = recalculate oifs and start
>forwarding data? 

The RP will have remembered that it sent a (S,G) = prune for the sender,
and when it gets the (*,G) Join from R3 because the = receiver joined
again, it will send an (S,G) Join towards R1.

If the RP weren't in the middle of the path, data = would flow down the
(*,G) tree until R3 decided to switch to the = shortest path tree; since
the RP is in the middle these paths are the = same.

  Bill

------_=_NextPart_001_01C0233F.A40ED080-- From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Wed Sep 20 18:02:26 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id SAA09146 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 18:02:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA74818 for pim-list; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 14:38:08 -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 OAA74813 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 14:38:07 -0700 (PDT) From: nile333@kadet.co.uk Received: from senda2.ari.es (senda2.ari.es [194.224.88.143]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id OAA25301 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 14:38:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gnr.net (unknown [194.224.88.69]) by senda2.ari.es (Postfix) with SMTP id 8F05529463; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 23:37:44 +0200 (CEST) To: nile333@kadet.co.uk Subject: So, How in the heck have you been? Message-Id: <20000920213744.8F05529463@senda2.ari.es> Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 23:37:44 +0200 (CEST) Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk So, How in the heck have you been? Do you remember holding previous conversations regarding business and money making opportunities? I did not send this to you in error! You Said: If only I could find an easier way to make a higher income! and If I had more money, I could spend more time with my Family, and less time at work and I sure could use more money so I could pay off my bills once and for all! And I would love to get involved in a business in which will generate money while I am not at work (like a Gas Pump)! Dear Friend, There is a possibility that we haven’t met, but you were chosen by someone to receive this E-Mail. Please, please, print this off and read thoroughly. Be sure that you don’t miss any of the points outlined. Then put it down, and then read it again. I am sending you a whole lot of information in which you might not understand the first time you read it. If you don’t believe this program will work for you, send it to 10-20 of your closest friends (in which you trust deeply), and ask them what they think? This really works! Have faith, don’t miss this opportunity, get involved also, and it will work for you as it does for us!!!! Due to the popularity of this letter on the Internet, A Major Nightly News Program recently dedicated an entire show to the investigation of the program described below to see if it really can make people money. The show also investigated whether or not the program was legal. Their findings proved that there are absolutely no laws prohibiting the participation in the program. This has helped to show people that this is a simple, harmless and fun way to make extra money at home. The results have been truly remarkable. So many people are participating that those involved are doing much better than ever before. Since everyone makes more as more people try it out, its been very exciting. You will understand only if you get involved! ********** THE ENTIRE PLAN IS HERE BELOW ********** **** Print This Now For Future Reference **** $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ If you would like to make AT LEAST $50,000 in less than 90 days! If not, forward this to someone who would like to make this kind of money. It works (like designed) but only for those who follow it to the letter! Please read this program THEN READ IT AGAIN!! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ THIS IS A LEGITIMATE. LEGAL, MONEY MAKING OPPORTUNITY!! It does NOT require you to come into contact with people or make or take any telephone calls. Just follow the instructions, and you will make money. This simplified e-mail marketing program works perfectly 100% EVERY TIME! E-mail is the sales tool of the future. Take advantage of this virtually free method of advertising NOW!!! The longer you wait, the more people will be doing business using e-mail. Get your piece of this action!!! Hello, My name is Johnathon Rourke, I’m from Rhode Island. The enclosed information is something I almost let slip through my fingers. Fortunately, sometime later I re-read everything and gave some thought and study to it. Two years ago, the corporation I worked for the past twelve yearsdown-sized and my position was eliminated. After unproductive job interviews, I decided to open my own business. Over the past year,I incurred many unforeseen financial problems. I owed my family, friends and creditors over$35,000. The economy was taking a toll on my business and I just could not seem to make ends meet. I had to refinance and borrow against my home to support my family and struggling business. AT THAT MOMENT something significant happened in my life. I am writing to share the experience I hopes that this could change your life FOREVER. FINANCIALLY$$$!!! In mid December, I received this program in my e-mail. Six months prior to receiving this program I had been sending away for information on various business opportunities. All of the programs I received, in my opinion,were not cost effective. They were either toodifficult for me to comprehend or the initial investment was too muchfor me to risk to see if they would work. But as I was saying, in December of 1997 I received this program.I didn’t send for it, or ask for it, they just got my name off a mailing list. THANK GOODNESS FOR THAT!!! After reading it several times, to make sure I was reading it correctly. I couldn’t believe my eyes! Here was a MONEY MAKING MACHINE I could start immediately without any debt. Like most of you I was still a little skeptical and a little worried about the legalaspects of it all. So I checked it out with the U.S. Post Office (1-800-725-2161 24-hrs) and they confirmed that it is indeed legal ! After determining the program was LEGAL I decided WHY NOT!?!?? Initially I sent out 10,000 e-mails. It cost me about $15 for my time on-line. The great thing about e-mail is that I don’t need any paper for printing to send out the program, and because I also send the product (reports) by e-mail, my only expense is my time. In less than one week,I was starting to receive orders for REPORT #1. By January 13, I had received 26 orders for REPORT #1. Your goal is to RECEIVE at least 20 ORDERS FOR REPORT #1 WITHIN 2 WEEKS. IF YOU DON’T SEND OUT MORE PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU DO. My first step in making $50,000 in 90 days was done. By January 30, I had received 196 orders for REPORT #2. Your goal is to RECEIVE AT LEAST 100+ ORDERS FOR REPORT #2 WITHIN 2 WEEKS. IF NOT SEND OUT MORE PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU! DO. ONCE YOU HAVE 100 ORDERS, THE REST IS EASY, RELAX, YOU WILL MAKE YOUR $50,000 GOAL. Well, I had 196 orders for REPORT #2. 96 more than I needed. So I sat back and relaxed. By March 1, of my e-mailing of 10,000, received $58,000 with more coming in every day. I paid off ALL my debts and bought a much need new car! Please take your time to read this plan, IT WILL CHANGE YOUR LIFE FOREVER$!!! Remember, it won’t work if you don’t try it. This program does work, But you must follow it EXACTLY! Especially the rules of not trying to place your name in a different place. It won’t work and you’ll lose out on a lot of money! In order for this program to work, you must meet your goal of 20+ orders for REPORT #1, and 100+ orders for REPORT #2 and you will make $50,000 or more in 90 days. I AM LIVING PROOF THAT IT WORKS!!! If you choose not to participate in this program, I am sorry. It really is a great opportunity with little cost or risk to you. If you choose toparticipate, follow the program and you will be on your way to financial security. If you are a fellow business owner and are financial trouble like I was, or you want to start your own business, consider this a sign. I DID! $$ Sincerely, Johnathon Rourke A PERSONAL NOTE FROM THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS PROGRAM: By the time you have read the enclosed program and reports, you should have concluded that such a program, and one that is legal, cpuld not have been created by an amateur. Let me tell you a little about myself. I had a profitable business for 10 years. Then in 1979 my business began falling off. I was doing the same things that were previously successful for me, but it wasn’t working. Finally, I figured it out. It wasn’t me, it was the economy. Inflation and recession had replaced the stable economy that had been with us since 1945. I don’t have to tell you what happened to the unemployment rate because many of you know from first hand experience. There were more failures and bankruptcies than ever before. The middle class was vanishing. Those who knew what they were doing invested wisely and moved up. Those who did not, including those who never had anything to save or invest, were moving down into the ranks of the poor. As the saying goes, THE RICH GET RICHER ANDTHE POOR GET POORER. The traditional methods of making money will never allow you to move up or get rich, inflation will see to that You have just received the rest of your life, with NO RISK and JUST A LITTLE BIT OF EFFORT. You can make more money in the next few months than you have everimagined.I should also point out that I will not see a penny of this money, nor anyone else who has provided a testimonial for this program. I retired from the program after sending thousands and thousands of programs. Follow the program EXACTLY AS INSTRUCTED. Do not change it in any way. It works exceedingly well as it is now. Remember to e-mail a copyof this exciting report to everyone you can think of. One of the people you send this to may send out 50,000 and your name will be on everyone of them! REMEMBER though, ------ the MORE YOU SEND OUT, the more potential customers you will reach. So my friend, I have given you the ideas, information, materials and opportunity to become financially independent. IT IS UP TO YOU!! NOW DO IT!! BEFORE YOU delete this program from your in box, as I almost did, take a little time to read it and REALLY THINK ABOUT IT. Get a pencil and figure out what could happen when YOU participate. Figure out the worst possible response and no matter how you calculate it, you will still make a lot of money! You will definitely get back what you invested. Any doubts you have will vanish when your first orders come in. $$$ IT WORKS!!! $$$ Jody Jacobs Richmond, VA. HERE’S HOW THIS AMAZING PROGRAM WILL MAKE YOU THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS$$$$!!!! This method of raising capital REALLY WORKS 100% EVERY TIME. I am sure that you could use up to $50,000 or more in the next 90 days. Before you say BULL, please read this program carefully. This is not a chain letter,but a perfectly legal money making business. As with all multi-level businesses, we build our business by recruiting new partners and selling our products. Every state in the USA allows you to recruit new multi-level business partners, and we sell and deliver a product for EVERY dollar received. YOUR ORDERS COME BY MAIL AND ARE FILLED BY E-MAIL, so you are not involved in personal selling. You do it privately in your own home, store or office. This is the EASIEST marketing plan anywhere! It is simply order filling by e-mail! The product is informational and instructional material, keys to the secrets for everyone on how to open the doors to the magic world of E-COMMERCE, the information highway, the wave of the future ! PLAN SUMMARY: (1) You order the 4 reports listed below ($5 each) They come to you by e-mail. (2) Save a copy of this entire letter and put your name after Report #1 and move the other names down. (3) Via the internet, access Yahoo.com or any of the other major search engines to locate hundreds of bulk e-mail service companies (search for bulk email) and have them send 25,000 50,000 emails for you about $49+. (4) Orders will come to you by postal mail simply e-mail them the Report they ordered. Let me ask you isn’t this about as easy as it gets? By the way there are over 50 MILLION e-mail address with millions more joining the internet each year so don’t worry about running out or saturation. People are used to seeing and hearing the same advertisements every day on radio/TV. How many times have you received the same pizza flyers on your door? Then one day you are hungry for pizza and order one. Same thing with this letter. I received this letter many times then one day I decided it was time to try it. YOU CAN START TODAY UST DO THESE EASY STEPS: STEP #1 ORDER THE FOUR REPORTS Order the four reports shown on the list below (you can’t sell them if you don’t order them). For each report, send $5.00 CASH, the NAME & NUMBER OF THE REPORT YOU ARE ORDERING, YOUR E-MAIL ADDRESS, and YOUR NAME & RETURN ADDRESS (in case of a problem) to the person whose name appears on the list next to the report.MAKE SURE YOUR RETURN ADDRESS IS ON YOUR ENVELOPE IN CASE OF ANY MAIL PROBLEMS! Within a few days you will receive, by e-mail each of the four reports.Save them on your computer so you can send them to the 1,000’s of people who will order them from you. STEP #2. ADD YOUR MAILING ADDRESS TO THIS LETTER a. Look below for the listing of the four reports. b. After you’ve ordered the four reports, delete the name and address under REPORT #4. This person has made it through the cycle. c. Move the name and address under REPORT #3 down to REPORT #4. d. Move the name and address under REPORT #2 down to REPORT #3. e. Move the name and address under REPORT #1 down to REPORT #2. f. Insert your name/address in the REPORT #1 position. Please make sure you COPY ALL INFORMATION, every name and address, ACCURATELY! STEP #3. Take this entire letter, including the modified list of names, and save it to your computer. Make NO changes to these instructions. Now you are ready to use this entire e-mail to send by e-mail to prospects. Report #1 will tell you how to download bulk email software and email address so you can send it out to thousands of people while you sleep! Remember that 50,000+ new people are joining the internet every month! Your cost to participate in this is practically nothing ( surely you can afford $20 and initial bulk mailing cost). You obviously already have a computer and an Internet connection and e-mail is FREE! There are two primary methods of building your downline: METHOD #1: SENDING BULK E-MAIL let’s say that you decide to start small, just to see how it goes, and we’ll assume you and all those involved email out only 2,000 programs each. Let’s also assume that the mailing receives a 0.5% response. The response could be much better. Also, many people will email out thousands of thousands of programs instead of 2,000 (Why stop at 2000?) But continuing with this example, you send out only 2,000 programs. With a 0.5% response, that is only 10 orders for REPORT #1. Those 10 people respond by sending out 2,000 programs each for a total of 20,000. Out of those 0.5%, 100 people respond and order REPORT #2.Those 100 mail out 2,000 programs each for a total of 200,000. The 0.5% response to that is 1,000 orders for REPORT #3. Those 1,000 send out 2,000 programs each for a 2,000,000 total. The 0.5% response to that is 10,000 orders for REPORT #4. That’s 10,000 $5 bills for you. CASH!!! Your total income in this example is $50 + $500 + $5000 + $50,000 for a total of $55,550!!! REMEMBER FRIEND, THIS IS ASSUMING 1,990 OUT OF THE 2,000 PEOPLE YOU MAIL TO WILL DO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING AND TRASH THIS PROGRAM! DARE TO THINK FOR A MOMENT WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF EVERYONE, OR HALF SENT OUT 100,000 PROGRAMS INSTEAD OF 2,000. Believe me, many people will do just that, and more! METHOD #2 PLACING FREE ADS ON THE INTERNET Advertising on the internet is very, very inexpensive, and there are HUNDREDS of FREE places to advertise. Let’s say you decide to start small to see how well it works. Assume your goal is to get ONLY 10 people to participate on your first level. (Placing a lot of FREE ads on the Internet will EASILY get a larger response). Also assume that everyone else in YOUR ORGANIZATION gets only 10 downline members. Look how this small number accumulates to achieve the STAGGERING results below: 1St level your first 10 send you $5........................$50 2nd level 10 members from those 10 ($5 x 100)............$500 3rd level 10 members from those 100 ($5 x 1,000)......$5,000 4th level 10 members from those 1,000 ($5 x 10,000)..$50,000 $$$$$$ THIS TOTALS ------------------------------------------------55,5550 $$$$$ AMAZING ISN’T IT Remember friends, this assumes that the people who participate only recruit 10 people each. Think for a moment what would happen if they got 20 people to participate! Most people get 100’s of participants and many will continue to work this program, sending out programs WITH YOUR NAME ON THEM for years! THINK ABOUT IT! People are going to get emails about this plan from you or somebody else and many will work this plan the question is Don’t you want your name to be on the emails they will send out? *** DON’T MISS OUT !!!*** ***JUST TRY IT ONCE !!!*** ***SEE WHAT HAPPENS !!!*** ***YOU'LL BE AMAZED !!!*** ALWAYS PROVIDE SAME DAY SERVICE ON ALL ORDERS! This will guarantee that the e-mail THEY send out with YOUR name and address on it will be prompt because they can’t advertise until they receive the report! GET STARTED TODAY: PLACE YOUR ORDER FOR THE FOUR REPORTS NOW. Note:-- ALWAYS SEND $5 CASH (U.S. CURRENCY) FOR EACH REPORT. CHECKS NOT ACCEPTED. Make sure the cash is concealed by wrapping it in two sheets of paper. On one of those sheets write: (a) the number & name of the report you are ordering (b) your e-mail address, and (c) your name & postal address. REPORT #1b The Insider’s Guide to Advertising for Free on the Internet ORDER REPORT #1 FROM: NICK NICHOLAS 473 MICHIGAN ST ST.PAUL, MN 55102 NOTE: I and every member below are dedicated at helping you with this program so it will work for you also. TRY US! REPORT #2 The Insider’s Guide to Sending Bulk E-Mail on the Internet ORDER REPORT #2 FROM: DIANE COLON 1811 TAMARIND AVE # 206 LOS ANGELES, CA. 90028 REPORT #3 The Secrets to Multilevel Marketing on the Internet ORDER REPORT #3 FROM: MELISSA HOGENMILLER 3709 MONHEIM ROAD CONOVER, WI 54519 REPORT #4 How to become a Millionaire utilizing the Power of Multilevel Marketing and the Internet ORDER REPORT #4 FROM: CATHY BARROW 10 SYCAMORE STREET CONWAY, SC 29527 *************TIPS FOR SUCCESS*************** TREAT THIS AS YOUR BUSINESS! Be prompt, professional, and follow the directions accurately. Send for the four reports IMMEDIATELY so you will have them when the orders start coming in because: When you receive a $5 order you MUST send out the requested product/report. It is required for this to be a legal business and they need the reports to send out their letter (with your name on them). --ALWAYS PROVIDE SAME-DAY SERVICE ON THE ORDERS YOU RECEIVE. Be patient and persistent with this program- If you follow the instructions exactly results WILL FOLLOW. $$$$ ************ YOUR SUCCESS GUIDELINES *************** Follow these guidelines to guarantee your success: If you don’t receive 20 orders for REPORT #1 within two weeks, continue advertising or sending e-mail until you do. Then a couple of weeks later you should receive at least 100 orders for REPORT #2. If you don’t continue advertising or sending e-mail until you do. Once you have received 100 or more orders for REPORT #2, YOU CAN RELAX, because the system is already working for you, and the cash will continue to roll in! THIS IS IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER: Every time your name is moved down on the list, you are placed in front of a DIFFERENT report. You can KEEP TRACK of your PROGRESS by watching which report people are ordering from you. To generate more income, simply send another batch of e-mails or continue placing ads and start the whole process again! There is no limit to the income you will generate from this business! Before you make your decision as to whether or not you participate in this program. Please answer one question: ARE YOU HAPPY WITH YOUR PRESENT INCOME OR JOB? 1. If the answer is no, then please look at the following facts about this super simple MLM program: NO face to face selling, NO meetings, NO inventory! NO Telephone calls, NO big cost to start! Nothing to learn, No skills needed! (Surely you know how to send email?) 2. No equipment to buy you already have a computer and internet connection so you have everything you need to fill orders! 3. You are selling a product which does NOT COST ANYTHING TO PRODUCE OR SHIP! (Email copies of the reports are FREE!) 4. All of your customers pay you in CASH! This program will change your LIFE FOREEVER!! Look at the potential for you to be able to quit your job and live a life of luxury you could only dream about! Imagine getting out of debt and buying the car and home of your dreams and being able to work a super-high paying leisurely easy business from home! $$$ FINALLY MAKE SOME DREAMS COME TRUE! $$$ ACT NOW! Take your first step toward achieving financial independence. Order the reports and follow the program outlined above __ SUCCESS will be your reward. Thank you for your time and consideration. PLEASE NOT: If you need help with starting a business, registering a business name, learning now income tax is handled, etc., contact your local office of the Small Business Administration (A Federal Agency) 1-800-827-5722 for free help and answers to questions. Also the Internal Revenue Service offers free help via telephone and free seminars about business tax requirements. Your earnings are highly dependent on your activities and advertising. The information contained on this site and in the report constitutes no guarantees stated nor implied. In the event that it is determined that this site or report constitutes a guarantee of any kind, that guarantee is now void. The earnings amounts listed on this site and in the report are estimates only. If you have any questions of the legality of this program, contact the Office of Associate Director for Marketing Practices, Federal Trade Commission, Bureau of Consumer Protection in Washington DC. Under Bill s.1618 TITLE III passed by the 105th US Congress this letter cannot be considered spam as long as the sender includes contact information and a method of removal. This is a one time e-mail transmission. No request for removal is necessary. From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Wed Sep 20 19:47:52 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id TAA11181 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 19:47:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA76179 for pim-list; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 16:33:34 -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 QAA76174 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 16:33:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-blue.research.att.com (mail-blue.research.att.com [135.207.30.102]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id QAA05353 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 16:33:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alliance.research.att.com (alliance.research.att.com [135.207.26.26]) by mail-blue.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 314E84CE06; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 19:31:02 -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 TAA17622; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 19:30:56 -0400 (EDT) From: Bill Fenner Received: (from fenner@localhost) by windsor.research.att.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.5) id QAA13185; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 16:30:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200009202330.QAA13185@windsor.research.att.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII To: skopalle@nortelnetworks.com Subject: RE: Adding back pruned oifs Cc: pim@catarina.usc.edu Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 16:30:55 -0700 Versions: dmail (solaris) 2.2g/makemail 2.9a Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk >How long does the RP need to maintatin (Sp,G) information if no receivers >join the RP? Until the source stops sending. (The RP need not keep state at all if unpredictably increased join latency is acceptable.) >If RP fails to keep the (Sp,G) state, is RP supposed to create (S,G) state >with the Null-Register msg? Whether the RP joins to the source immediately or just decapsulates and forwards Register messages is a policy decision. If the policy says to join immediately, then yes, the Null-Register would create (S,G) state. Bill From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Wed Sep 20 19:47:52 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id TAA11180 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 19:47:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA76172 for pim-list; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 16:32:52 -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]) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA76167 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 16:32:51 -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 QAA04204 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 16:32:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zsc4c000.corpwest.baynetworks.com by ertpg14e1.nortelnetworks.com; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 19:24:24 -0400 Received: by zsc4c000.corpwest.baynetworks.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2652.35) id ; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 16:24:22 -0700 Message-ID: <5D630265EF50D311ABB60008C7917DB602F9480C@zsc4c004.corpwest.baynetworks.com> From: "Sri Kopalle" To: Bill Fenner Cc: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: RE: Adding back pruned oifs Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 16:24:21 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2652.35) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C02359.E815FAF0" Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C02359.E815FAF0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >RP is at R3. So, How join towards S will go out? >If R3 is the RP, then your picture of the initial state is incorrect: >R3- No, S,G Entry >>The RP must remember any sources that it sent a prune towards, if it doesn't want to cause large join latency. How long does the RP need to maintatin (Sp,G) information if no receivers join the RP? >>If it fails to keep this state, it will have to wait for R1 to send it a Null-Register which will remind it of the presence of the source, which could be as long as 60 seconds. If RP fails to keep the (Sp,G) state, is RP supposed to create (S,G) state with the Null-Register msg? Bill ------_=_NextPart_001_01C02359.E815FAF0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" RE: Adding back pruned oifs

>RP is at R3. So, How join towards S will go out? 

>If R3 is the RP, then your picture of the initial state is incorrect:

>R3- No, S,G Entry  

>>The RP must remember any sources that it sent a prune towards, if it
doesn't want to cause large join latency.

How long does the RP need to maintatin (Sp,G) information if no receivers join the RP?


>>If it fails to keep this state,
it will have to wait for R1 to send it a Null-Register which will remind
it of the presence of the source, which could be as long as 60 seconds.

If RP fails to keep the (Sp,G) state, is RP supposed to create (S,G) state with the Null-Register msg?


  Bill

------_=_NextPart_001_01C02359.E815FAF0-- From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Thu Sep 21 16:58:30 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id QAA14310 for ; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 16:58:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA85491 for pim-list; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 13:28:48 -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 NAA85486 for ; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 13:28:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nsa-mail.us.newbridge.com ([209.58.11.226]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id NAA09864 for ; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 13:28:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from smtpd@localhost) by nsa-mail.us.newbridge.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id QAA14743 for ; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 16:16:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from nsa-gw1.us.newbridge.com(209.58.11.225), claiming to be "herndon-mh1.us.newbridge.com" via SMTP by nsa-mail.us.newbridge.com, id smtpdAAAa003aJ; Thu Sep 21 16:16:21 2000 Received: from nsamail01.us.newbridge.com by herndon-mh1.us.newbridge.com with ESMTP for pim@catarina.usc.edu; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 16:24:01 -0400 Received: from alcatel.com ([138.120.241.43]) by nsamail01.us.newbridge.com (Netscape Messaging Server 3.6) with ESMTP id AAA5B9D for ; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 16:24:00 -0400 Message-Id: <39CA6F52.3ADC8BA7@alcatel.com> Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 16:28:02 -0400 From: "Nagesh Chintada" Organization: Carrier Internetworking Division, Alcatel X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Archivce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Is there an Archive for PIM-SS or SSM related discussions? There is none listed on the IETF website. Thanks, Nagesh From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Fri Sep 22 14:25:25 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id OAA22622 for ; Fri, 22 Sep 2000 14:25:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA96174 for pim-list; Fri, 22 Sep 2000 11:08:21 -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 LAA96169 for ; Fri, 22 Sep 2000 11:08:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailgate.pit.comms.marconi.com (mailgate.pit.comms.marconi.com [169.144.68.6]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id LAA24630 for ; Fri, 22 Sep 2000 11:08:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailman.pit.comms.marconi.com (mailman.pit.comms.marconi.com [169.144.2.12]) by mailgate.pit.comms.marconi.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA08540 for ; Fri, 22 Sep 2000 14:03:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from whq-msgrtr-02.fore.com (whq-msgrtr-02.pit.comms.marconi.com [169.144.2.220]) by mailman.pit.comms.marconi.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA12840 for ; Fri, 22 Sep 2000 14:03:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: by whq-msgrtr-02.pit.comms.marconi.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Fri, 22 Sep 2000 14:03:25 -0400 Message-ID: From: "Jayaraman, Rajagopal" To: "'pim@catarina.usc.edu'" Subject: Selection of Incoming Interface in PIM DM. Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 14:03:22 -0400 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 all, We have the following question. When selecting the incoming interface for recording the (S G o i) entry on receiving a mcast data packet, the spec says to use RPF on the unicast routing table to figure out the incoming interface for S. However what if we have two paths between the two multicast routers R1 and R2 and the shortest path does not support multicast? In this case the incoming interface that we record in our table will not be multicast enabled. How is this situation supposed to be handled? Apologies if this has been thrashed out before....:-) Thanks, Raj (Rajagopal.jayaraman@marconi.com) Subuddh (Subuddh.Parekh@marconi.com) From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Fri Sep 22 15:36:41 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id PAA25476 for ; Fri, 22 Sep 2000 15:36:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA96954 for pim-list; Fri, 22 Sep 2000 12:10:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: catarina.usc.edu: majordom set sender to owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu using -f Received: from usc.edu (root@usc.edu [128.125.253.136] (may be forged)) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA96949 for ; Fri, 22 Sep 2000 12:10:03 -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 MAA06255 for ; Fri, 22 Sep 2000 12:09:42 -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 0B7041E02B; Fri, 22 Sep 2000 15:08:11 -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 PAA12054; Fri, 22 Sep 2000 15:08:10 -0400 (EDT) From: Bill Fenner Received: (from fenner@localhost) by windsor.research.att.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.5) id MAA06278; Fri, 22 Sep 2000 12:08:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200009221908.MAA06278@windsor.research.att.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII To: rajagopal.jayaraman@marconi.com Subject: Re: Selection of Incoming Interface in PIM DM. Cc: pim@catarina.usc.edu Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 12:08:09 -0700 Versions: dmail (solaris) 2.2g/makemail 2.9a Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk If you have incongruent unicast and multicast topologies, you have to run an IGP for each and use only the routes learned by the multicast-aware IGP. For example, Cisco IOS allows you to run DVMRP to learn the multicast topology. (I think that IGPs that support multiple metrics could support carrying both a unicast and multicast table in one IGP, similar to MBGP, but as far as I know this has never been developed.) Bill From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Fri Sep 22 21:36:44 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id VAA00944 for ; Fri, 22 Sep 2000 21:36:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA00120 for pim-list; Fri, 22 Sep 2000 18:21:33 -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]) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA00115 for ; Fri, 22 Sep 2000 18:21:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailgate.pit.comms.marconi.com (mailgate.pit.comms.marconi.com [169.144.68.6]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id SAA11160 for ; Fri, 22 Sep 2000 18:21:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailman.pit.comms.marconi.com (mailman.pit.comms.marconi.com [169.144.2.12]) by mailgate.pit.comms.marconi.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA03651; Fri, 22 Sep 2000 21:17:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from whq-msgrtr-02.fore.com (whq-msgrtr-02.pit.comms.marconi.com [169.144.2.220]) by mailman.pit.comms.marconi.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA15206; Fri, 22 Sep 2000 21:17:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: by whq-msgrtr-02.pit.comms.marconi.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Fri, 22 Sep 2000 21:17:11 -0400 Message-ID: <1DE644007776D3119FAC00204840ECF402065B45@whq-msgusr-03.pit.comms.marconi.com> From: "Parekh, Subuddh" To: "'RShekhar@unispherenetworks.com'" Cc: "'pim@catarina.usc.edu'" , "Jayaraman, Rajagopal" Subject: Re: Selection of Incoming Interface in PIM DM. Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 21:17:10 -0400 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 > -----Original Message----- > From: Jayaraman, Rajagopal [mailto:Rajagopal.Jayaraman@marconi.com] > Sent: Friday, September 22, 2000 2:03 PM > To: 'pim@catarina.usc.edu' > Subject: Selection of Incoming Interface in PIM DM. > > > > Hi all, > Seems like there are a bunch of ways to solve the problem. Is the solution of creating a multicast view of the routing table something very standard? The unicast routing protocol would have to be modified to maintain two trees and update two tables, one unicast topology and one multicast one. Is there any move to address this issue in the spec and specify a particular behavior? Thanks, Subuddh (Subuddh.Parekh@marconi.com) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- As long as you can guarantee that chosing the "multicast capable" next-hops wont form a loop, you should be fine. That is to say that you should have a "multicast view" of your unicast (or rpf-check) routing table which is built by considering only the multicast running interfaces/links of the routers and do not create a loop. > We have the following question. When selecting the incoming > interface for > recording the (S G o i) entry on receiving > a mcast data packet, the spec says to use RPF on the unicast > routing table > to figure out the incoming interface for S. However > what if we have two paths between the two multicast routers > R1 and R2 and > the shortest path does not support multicast? > In this case the incoming interface that we record in our > table will not be > multicast enabled. How is this situation supposed to > be handled? Apologies if this has been thrashed out before....:-) > > Thanks, > > Raj (Rajagopal.jayaraman@marconi.com) > Subuddh (Subuddh.Parekh@marconi.com) > > > From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Tue Sep 26 10:38:29 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id KAA10621 for ; Tue, 26 Sep 2000 10:38:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id HAA35314 for pim-list; Tue, 26 Sep 2000 07:19:08 -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] (may be forged)) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id HAA35309 for ; Tue, 26 Sep 2000 07:19:07 -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 HAA20836 for ; Tue, 26 Sep 2000 07:19:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zbl6c016.corpeast.baynetworks.com (actually zbl6c016) by smtprch1.nortel.com; Tue, 26 Sep 2000 09:10:21 -0500 Received: from zbl6c008.corpeast.baynetworks.com ([132.245.205.58]) by zbl6c016.corpeast.baynetworks.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2652.39) id T3C0QZ5P; Tue, 26 Sep 2000 10:10:06 -0400 Received: from nortelnetworks.com (sandicknt.corpeast.baynetworks.com [132.245.252.65]) by zbl6c008.corpeast.baynetworks.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2652.39) id TJWSSZ0T; Tue, 26 Sep 2000 10:10:07 -0400 Message-ID: <39D0AE3E.9E025B1B@nortelnetworks.com> Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 10:10:07 -0400 X-Sybari-Space: 00000000 00000000 00000000 From: "Hal Sandick" Reply-To: "Hal Sandick" Organization: Nortel Networks X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bill Fenner CC: rajagopal.jayaraman@marconi.com, pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Re: Selection of Incoming Interface in PIM DM. References: <200009221908.MAA06278@windsor.research.att.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bill, It' been a while since I worked with MOSPF, but I as I remebmer it allows links and routers to be marked multicast capable and this is considered during tree calculation. Regards, Hal Bill Fenner wrote: > If you have incongruent unicast and multicast topologies, you have to run > an IGP for each and use only the routes learned by the multicast-aware > IGP. For example, Cisco IOS allows you to run DVMRP to learn the > multicast topology. (I think that IGPs that support multiple metrics > could support carrying both a unicast and multicast table in one IGP, > similar to MBGP, but as far as I know this has never been developed.) > > Bill From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Tue Sep 26 14:51:33 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id OAA14289 for ; Tue, 26 Sep 2000 14:51:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA37339 for pim-list; Tue, 26 Sep 2000 11:33:22 -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 LAA37334 for ; Tue, 26 Sep 2000 11:33:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailgate.pit.comms.marconi.com (mailgate.pit.comms.marconi.com [169.144.68.6]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id LAA13461 for ; Tue, 26 Sep 2000 11:33:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailman.pit.comms.marconi.com (mailman.pit.comms.marconi.com [169.144.2.12]) by mailgate.pit.comms.marconi.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA14936; Tue, 26 Sep 2000 14:28:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from whq-msgrtr-01.fore.com (whq-msgrtr-01.pit.comms.marconi.com [169.144.2.221]) by mailman.pit.comms.marconi.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA04883; Tue, 26 Sep 2000 14:28:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: by whq-msgrtr-01.pit.comms.marconi.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Tue, 26 Sep 2000 14:28:25 -0400 Message-ID: From: "Jayaraman, Rajagopal" To: "'Hal Sandick'" , Bill Fenner Cc: pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: RE: Selection of Incoming Interface in PIM DM. Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 14:28:25 -0400 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 In my case, I am running OSPF over two interfaces, one being the shortest path to the source and other being the secondary path. Now my UCAST route table contains one route (shortest) to the source, but this is over a non-mcast iface. Secondary path is an mcast iface with PIM running over it. I don't have DVMRP/MOSPF/MBGP protocols present. What could be the solution for this scenario? Raj Jayaram. -----Original Message----- From: Hal Sandick [mailto:hsandick@nortelnetworks.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2000 7:10 AM To: Bill Fenner Cc: Jayaraman, Rajagopal; pim@catarina.usc.edu Subject: Re: Selection of Incoming Interface in PIM DM. Bill, It' been a while since I worked with MOSPF, but I as I remebmer it allows links and routers to be marked multicast capable and this is considered during tree calculation. Regards, Hal Bill Fenner wrote: > If you have incongruent unicast and multicast topologies, you have to run > an IGP for each and use only the routes learned by the multicast-aware > IGP. For example, Cisco IOS allows you to run DVMRP to learn the > multicast topology. (I think that IGPs that support multiple metrics > could support carrying both a unicast and multicast table in one IGP, > similar to MBGP, but as far as I know this has never been developed.) > > Bill From owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Sat Sep 30 02:18:46 2000 Received: from catarina.usc.edu (catarina.usc.edu [128.125.51.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id CAA25974 for ; Sat, 30 Sep 2000 02:18:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA71933 for pim-list; Fri, 29 Sep 2000 22:57:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: catarina.usc.edu: majordom set sender to owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu using -f Received: from usc.edu (root@usc.edu [128.125.253.136]) by catarina.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA71928 for ; Fri, 29 Sep 2000 22:57:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fsnt.future.futsoft.com ([203.197.140.35]) by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP id WAA29242 for ; Fri, 29 Sep 2000 22:57:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kailash.future.futsoft.com (unverified) by fsnt.future.futsoft.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 2.0.15) with ESMTP id for ; Sat, 30 Sep 2000 11:27:02 +0530 Received: from sabaris (rosario.future.futsoft.com [10.0.2.1]) by kailash.future.futsoft.com (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id LAA32534 for ; Sat, 30 Sep 2000 11:13:12 +0530 Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Sat, 30 Sep 2000 11:21:30 +1000 Message-Id: <01C02AD0.9517C120.sabaris@future.futsoft.com> From: Sabari S Reply-To: "sabaris@future.futsoft.com" To: "'pim-implementors'" Subject: fragmentation of bootstrap msg ? Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 11:21:29 +1000 Organization: FSPL X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 X-MS-Attachment: WINMAIL.DAT 0 00-00-1980 00:00 Sender: owner-pim@catarina.usc.edu Precedence: bulk hi, any of u pl explain why semantic fragmentation of bootstrap msg is needed ? As IP implementations will support fragmentation and reassembly feature why fragmentation of bootstrap msg is needed ? awaiting for ur valuable reply sabari begin 600 WINMAIL.DAT M>)\^(AX!`0:0" `$```````!``$``0>0!@`(````Y 0```````#H``$(@ <` M& ```$E032Y-:6-R;W-O9G0@36%I;"Y.;W1E`#$(`0V ! `"`````@`"``$$ MD 8`G $```$````0`````P``, (````+``\.``````(!_P\!````;P`````` M``"U.\+ +'<0&J&\" `K*E;"%0````?\6^Z8QM(1G%X`(#5#ZUZ$C0`````` M`($K'Z2^HQ 9G6X`W0$/5 (`````<&EM+6EM<&QE;65N=&]R``(P`0````4```!33510`````!X``S ! M````%0```'!I;4!C871A``$P`0```!,````G<&EM+6EM<&QE;65N=&]R``L`$0`H``8`2 $!"8 !`"$````W-T,Y1D8Y-$,R.39$-#$Q M0C9!-C P,3 U03@W-3(S10`5!P$#D 8`0 0``" ````+``(``0````L`(P`` M`````P`F```````+`"D```````,`-@``````0 `Y`(!YR\)\*L !'@!P``$` M```A````9G)A9VUE;G1A=&EO;B!O9B!B;V]T# $````%```` M4TU44 `````>`!\,`0```!L```!S86)A @ MV0-086<'@ (P818@`B!#%((&X&]T "8-44<&8=H'0(<&45@Q9OYQ=^&-T3Y&%W"W 6( \@IQ[P!;$(<"!V!T!U M`:#7&F =@0M0>1/D`!" "" &``````# ```````` M1@````!4A0```0````0````X+C `"P`1@ @@!@``````P ```````$8````` M#H4````````#`!* "" &``````# ````````1@`````1A0````````,`$X ( M( 8``````, ```````!&`````!B%````````'@`4@ @@!@``````P `````` M`$8`````-H4```$````!`````````!X`%8 (( 8``````, ```````!&```` M`#>%```!`````0`````````>`!: "" &``````# ````````1@`````XA0`` F`0````$`````````'@`]``$````!``````````,`#33]-P``)\L` ` end