http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pim hourly 1 1901-01-01T00:00+00:00 http://gmane.org/img/gmane-25t.png http://gmane.org http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pim/3023 <pre>Hi, We published a new draft for encoding BSR information in BGP for BGP-MVPN based deployments. Please review and let us know your feedback. http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kurapati-dynamicrp-bgpmvpn-00.txt Thanks, Pavan -----Original Message----- From: internet-drafts&lt; at &gt;ietf.org [mailto:internet-drafts&lt; at &gt;ietf.org] Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 7:08 PM To: Pavan Kurapati; Marco Rodrigues; Saud Asif; Kurt Windisch Subject: New Version Notification for draft-kurapati-dynamicrp-bgpmvpn-00.txt A new version of I-D, draft-kurapati-dynamicrp-bgpmvpn-00.txt has been successfully submitted by Pavan Kurapati and posted to the IETF repository. Filename: draft-kurapati-dynamicrp-bgpmvpn Revision: 00 Title: Dynamic RP encodings in BGP based MVPNs Creation date: 2013-05-24 Group: Individual Submission Number of pages: 20 URL: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-kurapati-dynamicrp-bgpmvpn-00.txt Status: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-kurapati-dynamicrp-bgpmvpn Htmlized: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kurapati-dynamicrp-bgpmvpn-00 Abstract: PIM Group-to-RP mappings are distributed dynamically using protocols such as BSR or Auto-RP. The BGP-MVPN specification provides for this information to be encapsulated in an I-PMSI or S-PMSI provider tunnel between the PEs in an MVPN environment. Since this is control information, it is desirable to signal this information in BGP between PEs, similar to carrying other customer control state such as C-Multicast routes. This document specifies the mechanisms and procedures to carry bootstrap information via BGP to provide true control and data plane separation. The IETF Secretariat </pre> Pavan Kurapati 2013-05-24T13:56:58 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pim/3020 <pre> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Protocol Independent Multicast Working Group of the IETF. Title : Survey Report on PIM-SM Implementations and Deployments Author(s) : Lianshu Zheng Zhaohui Zhang Rishabh Parekh Filename : draft-ietf-pim-rfc4601-update-survey-report-01.txt Pages : 15 Date : 2013-05-23 Abstract: This document provides supporting documentation to advance the Protocol Independent Multicast - Sparse Mode (PIM-SM) protocol from IETF Proposed Standard to Internet Standard. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pim-rfc4601-update-survey-report There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pim-rfc4601-update-survey-report-01 A diff from the previous version is available at: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-pim-rfc4601-update-survey-report-01 Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ </pre> internet-drafts< at >ietf.org 2013-05-23T15:28:48 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pim/3015 <pre>Hi We, the chairs, want to speed up the process of updating RFC 4601 and as a next step we want to make sure that you, the working group, are happy with the implementation report. Once the group is happy, we want to get the report published, and then finalize the updates to 4601 based on that. The report results have been presented to the group. There were some comments in the adoption call, and the adopted version took them into account. The draft is available at http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pim-rfc4601-update-survey-report-00 With this email we're starting a working group last call, ending Sunday June 2nd. This is important work and we need your review. It is the bases for updating one of our core RFCs, please read through the report and tell us whether it is ready to be published. Stig </pre> Stig Venaas 2013-05-21T16:56:39 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pim/3008 <pre>Hi, Take a look at http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?eid=905 I can't make head or tail of what the appropriate resolution is. Advice please. And any ideas if there is a better place to discuss this. Thanks, Adrian </pre> Adrian Farrel 2013-05-11T16:36:53 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pim/3003 <pre>draft-zhou-pim-vrrp-01 was presented in our most recent pim meeting in Orlando. 4 people were in favor of adopting the draft. Zero against. Please read the draft (its short) and provide an opinion either way by the end of next Friday the 17th. http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-zhou-pim-vrrp-01.txt thanks, mike </pre> Mike McBride 2013-05-09T19:48:17 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pim/2990 <pre> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Protocol Independent Multicast Working Group of the IETF. Title : Explicit RPF Vector Author(s) : Javed Asghar IJsbrand Wijnands Sowmya Krishnaswamy Apoorva Karan Vishal Arya Filename : draft-ietf-pim-explicit-rpf-vector-00.txt Pages : 5 Date : 2013-04-26 Abstract: This document describes a use of the Reverse Path Forwarding (RPF) Vector TLV as defined in [RPC 5496] to build multicast trees via an explicitly configured path sent in the PIM join. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pim-explicit-rpf-vector There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pim-explicit-rpf-vector-00 Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ </pre> internet-drafts< at >ietf.org 2013-05-06T17:21:43 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pim/2984 <pre>Biggest Fake Conference in Computer Science We are researchers from different parts of the world and conducted a study on the world’s biggest bogus computer science conference WORLDCOMP ( http://sites.google.com/site/worlddump1 ) organized by Prof. Hamid Arabnia from University of Georgia, USA. We submitted a fake paper to WORLDCOMP 2011 and again (the same paper with a modified title) to WORLDCOMP 2012. This paper had numerous fundamental mistakes. Sample statements from that paper include: (1). Binary logic is fuzzy logic and vice versa (2). Pascal developed fuzzy logic (3). Object oriented languages do not exhibit any polymorphism or inheritance (4). TCP and IP are synonyms and are part of OSI model (5). Distributed systems deal with only one computer (6). Laptop is an example for a super computer (7). Operating system is an example for computer hardware Also, our paper did not express any conceptual meaning. However, it was accepted both the times without any modifications (and without any reviews) and we were invited to submit the final paper and a payment of $500+ fee to present the paper. We decided to use the fee for better purposes than making Prof. Hamid Arabnia (Chairman of WORLDCOMP) rich. After that, we received few reminders from WORLDCOMP to pay the fee but we never responded. We MUST say that you should look at the above website if you have any thoughts to submit a paper to WORLDCOMP. DBLP and other indexing agencies have stopped indexing WORLDCOMP’s proceedings since 2011 due to its fakeness. See http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/conf/icai/index.html for of one of the conferences of WORLDCOMP and notice that there is no listing after 2010. See Section 2 of http://sites.google.com/site/dumpconf for comments from well-known researchers about WORLDCOMP. The status of your WORLDCOMP papers can be changed from scientific to other (i.e., junk or non-technical) at any time. Better not to have a paper than having it in WORLDCOMP and spoil the resume and peace of mind forever! Our study revealed that WORLDCOMP is a money making business, using University of Georgia mask, for Prof. Hamid Arabnia. He is throwing out a small chunk of that money (around 20 dollars per paper published in WORLDCOMP’s proceedings) to his puppet (Mr. Ashu Solo or A.M.G. Solo) who publicizes WORLDCOMP and also defends it at various forums, using fake/anonymous names. The puppet uses fake names and defames other conferences to divert traffic to WORLDCOMP. He also makes anonymous phone calls and tries to threaten the critiques of WORLDCOMP (See Item 7 of Section 5 of above website). That is, the puppet does all his best to get a maximum number of papers published at WORLDCOMP to get more money into his (and Prof. Hamid Arabnia’s) pockets. Monte Carlo Resort (the venue of WORLDCOMP for more than 10 years, until 2012) has refused to provide the venue for WORLDCOMP’13 because of the fears of their image being tarnished due to WORLDCOMP’s fraudulent activities. That is why WORLDCOMP’13 is taking place at a different resort. WORLDCOMP will not be held after 2013. The draft paper submission deadline is over but still there are no committee members, no reviewers, and there is no conference Chairman. The only contact details available on WORLDCOMP’s website is just an email address! Let us make a direct request to Prof. Hamid arabnia: publish all reviews for all the papers (after blocking identifiable details) since 2000 conference. Reveal the names and affiliations of all the reviewers (for each year) and how many papers each reviewer had reviewed on average. We also request him to look at the Open Challenge (Section 6) at https://sites.google.com/site/moneycomp1 Sorry for posting to multiple lists. Spreading the word is the only way to stop this bogus conference. Please forward this message to other mailing lists and people. We are shocked with Prof. Hamid Arabnia and his puppet’s activities http://worldcomp-fake-bogus.blogspot.com Search Google using the keyword worldcomp fake for additional links. _______________________________________________ pim mailing list pim&lt; at &gt;ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim </pre> johnsonhammond1< at >hushmail.com 2013-04-27T17:29:18 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pim/2976 <pre> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Protocol Independent Multicast Working Group of the IETF. Title : Survey Report on PIM-SM Implementations and Deployments Author(s) : Lianshu Zheng Zhaohui Zhang Rishabh Parekh Filename : draft-ietf-pim-rfc4601-update-survey-report-00.txt Pages : 15 Date : 2013-04-23 Abstract: This document provides supporting documentation to advance the Protocol Independent Multicast - Sparse Mode (PIM-SM) protocol from IETF Proposed Standard to Internet Standard. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pim-rfc4601-update-survey-report There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pim-rfc4601-update-survey-report-00 Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ </pre> internet-drafts< at >ietf.org 2013-04-24T05:32:20 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pim/2965 <pre>Hello All, I have reviewed the draft (draft-asghar-pim-explicit-rpf-vector-01) and I would like to vote to approve the adoption of this draft because we need it for a while. I'm grateful its being standardized. Best Regards, Shahzad Ali Network Architect, CCIE 7466 _______________________________________________ pim mailing list pim&lt; at &gt;ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim </pre> Shahzad Ali 2013-04-07T21:35:46 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pim/2964 <pre>All,  After reviewing the draft ( draft-asghar-pim-explicit-rpf-vector-01), I'd like to vote to approve the adoption. Hope to see that standardized as soon as possible.   Best regards,  Kambiz Agahian Network Engineer M.Eng. , CCIE#25341 _______________________________________________ pim mailing list pim&lt; at &gt;ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim </pre> Kambiz Agahian 2013-04-05T16:57:48 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pim/2963 <pre>Hello, After reading this draft (draft-asghar-pim-explicit-rpf-vector-01), I vote to approve this adoption, which will help us tremendously in our network. Looking forward to seeing it standardized. Best Regards, Insik Park Sr. Network Engineer CCIE# 20653 _______________________________________________ pim mailing list pim&lt; at &gt;ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim </pre> Park, Insik 2013-04-05T21:44:43 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pim/2960 <pre>All, After reviewing the draft (draft-asghar-pim-explicit-rpf-vector-01), I'd certainly vote to approve the adoption. Hope to see this draft becomes a standard very soon since it provides the feature we have been looking for for a while. Best regards, Pang Chan (Daniel) Huang Principal Network Engineer, CCIE#21702 _______________________________________________ pim mailing list pim&lt; at &gt;ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim </pre> Huang, Pang Chan (Daniel 2013-04-05T18:41:18 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pim/2954 <pre>In Orlando, there was 10-0 in favor of adopting draft-asghar-pim-explicit-rpf-vector-01 as Informational. Please respond to the list with opinions, either way, over the next week. This adoption call will end next Wednesday the 10th. thanks, mike http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-asghar-pim-explicit-rpf-vector-01.txt </pre> Mike McBride 2013-04-04T02:45:56 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pim/2953 <pre>Hi, We have posted an updated draft that does inband authentication for PIM. Would appreciate comments and feedback! http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bhatia-zhang-pim-auth-extension-03 Cheers, Manav </pre> Bhatia, Manav (Manav 2013-03-31T05:01:01 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pim/2952 <pre>Thanks to Tom Taylor for taking the minutes. Please review and reply to Stig and I with any proposed changes/additions we may have missed. thanks, mike PIM WG minutes Friday 3/15, 9-11am Mike McBride, Stig Venaas No comments on agenda Status (Stig) ============= draft-ietf-pim-explicit-tracking Really need people to comment Looked for willingness to forward to IESG. 3 in favour, no one against. Taking to list again to confirm, PLEASE respond. Implementation report draft-zzp-pim-rfc4601-update-survey-report-00 Reviewed history. 8 for adoption, none against. Will check on list. Will do last call after small change and resubmission as draft-ietf-pim... Lenny repeated his opinion that it should be Informational PIM DR LOad Balancing (Toerless Eckert presenting) ================================================== draft-ietf-pim-drlb-02 Overview Update from -01 - changed hash algorithm - simplified some of the Hello options Next steps: - continued experiments with hash algorithm - implementation Perhaps WGLC after this next round Multiple Upstream Interface Support for IGMP/MLD Proxy ======================================================= draft-asaeda-pim-mldproxy-multif-01 Stig presenting Slides: Overview Terminology, Configuration Supported Address Prefix Supported Address Prefix -- Possible Scenarios Interface Priority Interface Priority -- Possible Scenarios Upstream Interface Take-Over Default Values Open Issue Next Steps - presented to Homenet ML as well - adopt here? Comment: some simplification possible -- have additional information. Comment (Thomas Schmidt): mobility inspires this work -- additional information not available. Comment (Toerless Eckert): Cisco has similar implementation, relies on routing info as suggested, could consider this stuff too. Compromise. Another comment: some routes could be provisioned by DHCP. Stig: on Linux, can create routes for multicast. Toerless agrees. Comment: need to decide whether to work on requiremnts or solution. Stig as Chair: yes, would have to decide which to work on. Need to figure which use cases are worth working on. Mike: are they shopping for WG? Stig: this is the logical place -- Multimob doesn't have the full scope. Extension of MLD proxy functionality to support multiple upstream interfaces ============================================================================ Slides: Problem statement - general application: common network access infrastructure to get info from multiple multicast providers Motivation - notes changes from previous version Fixed network communication scenarios Needed functionality per fixed scenario Mobile network communication scenarios Proxy mobile IPv6 (RFC5213) A minimal deployment option for multicast listeners in PMIPv6 domains (RFC6224) - Toerless: why not just use routes built up by MLD? Answer: Multimob charter - Thomas: routing actually done by policy rather than routing tables. Alternative more complex than one might expect. PMIP's function is to hide actual routing from mobile terminal. - take offline. Toerless: would like to substitute "IGMP/MLD" in place of "MLD". Agreed. Proposed next steps - collect more scenarios - get comments - start defining needed proxy extensions - move to PIM Stig asks: worth working on motivations, use cases? Yes. Bill Atkins: need requirements draft, this may be it. Do keep working on it. Possible outcome is that PIM needs change. Multi-Upstream Interfaces IGMP/MLD Proxy ======================================== draft-zhang-pim-muiimp-00 Presented by Thomas. Slides: Why multi-upstream interfaces? History - initial ideas in MAGMA Objectives and requirements - unique coverage of receivers - prevent routing loops Multi-Upstream Interfaces IGMP/MLD Proxy - proposed approach - route according to a filtering table Filter table for MUIIMP (More details) Is this work of interest? Stig: need to work up requirements. Premature to adopt at this time, but potentially of interest. Mike: need presentation on why PMIP chosen rather than LISP or other approaches. - response: Multimob focus was PMIP. Has certain advantages in compatibility with operator policy, implementation simplicity. draft-liu-multimob-igmp-mld-wireless-mobile-03 ============================================================== Mike McBride presenting. Slides: Aims New Option List Suspend/Resume Thomas: suspend/resume has more general use case. e.g. channel switching. Probably should be in separate document. Toerless: performance optimization needs to be supported by a performance requirement. Stig: Agreed - remove suspend/resume from draft. Will WG take this work if suspend/resume removed? 3 support, none against. Post revised document, then adoption request will be called. draft-asghar-pim-explicit-rpf-vector ==================================== Toerless Eckert presented. Slides: Editorial changes 00 -&gt; 01 Problem statement - building tree explicitly analogously to operation of RSVP Solution requirement: path diversity in live-live resiliency Motivation (detail) - author of "Maximally Redundant Tree" draft to discuss with Toerless. Stig says: concepts of this draft and MRT draft are orthogonal. Solution example (this draft): Explicit Path Vector TLV Stack Encoding - new PIM Join attribute Explicit RPF Vector Attribute TLV Format Moving forward - looking for feedback 10 in favour, none against. Pretty conclusive, check on mailing list. PIM VRRP Interoperability ========================= draft-zhou-pim-vrrp-01 Presented by Toerless. Slides: Rationale - Comment: VRRP is for host to router, PIM is router to router. Routers are smart enough to switch? Response: next slide. Use case - routers A and B do not run IGP dynamically for security reasons Proposed solution Tracking and Failover ditto, proposed change in -01 ditto, advantages PIM Assert BiDir Group Further Considerations Adopt? - Comment: seems like reasonable approach for solving when VRRP is used. Should fix the IGP problem. Use case seems to be a misuse of VRRP. Toerless: lot of deployment. Alternative use case presented orally does seem valid. 4 for adoption. None against. Will check on mailing list. PIM Join Attributes For LISP ============================ draft-arango-pim-join-attributes-for-lisp-00 Being presented in LISP too. Presented by Stig. Slides: Problem being solved Unicast transport Encoding Rcvr-Source ITR Outer IP Source Unsuitable Inner IP Source Unsuitable PIM J/P Attribute Solution (more for LISP WG) Encoding LISP Unicast Transport Information Transport Attribute Format Receiver RLOC Format Wrap up - hoping for LISP WG to decide on requirement, but if they do, work has to be done here. - question to Chair: could call for adoption happen before next IETF if LISP gives the word?. Mike: yes, could be done. Hierarchical Join/Prune Attributes ================================== draft-venaas-pim-hierarchicaljoinattr-00 Stig presenting. Trying to provide more efficient coding for particular situations. Slides: Introduction J/P message format J/P attribute hierarchy: - specify at upstream neighbour, group, or source address level - can override at lower level for more specific cases Encoding types Useful? - 3 for, none against. To the list. </pre> Mike McBride 2013-03-28T02:42:19 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pim/2944 <pre>Hi If you are presenting in Orlando, please provide your slides by Friday March 8th. Send them to pim-chairs&lt; at &gt;tools.ietf.org. Stig </pre> Stig Venaas 2013-03-06T22:18:11 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pim/2943 <pre>Dear All, I am currently working with pimd. I have a flat network(all the routers in the same network),connected linearly. h1-------t2-------t3-------u2------h2 Where h1 and h2 are leaf node which is acting as server and client in this case.I mean we are running a c program which will send the "Hello world" message over a multicasted network (Sender ip address:225.0.0.37 as programmed in c program) and other machine will receive those messages.On t2,t3 and u2 we are running pimd and t3 act as rendezvous point. In normal network the scenario is working(All the routers are in different network), but for the flat network(All the routers in the same network),the above configuration is not working i.e. we are not able to receive the "hello world" message. I am getting some messages like "cache miss,src 10.0.0.8 dest 225.0.0.37 ,Iif 0" The 10.0.0.8 is the ip address of h2 when h2 is acting as sender and h1 acting as receiver. I want to also know whether pimd wouldn't for flat network(All the routers in same network) Please help me in this scenario as I am stuck from a long time. Thanks in advance Regards Akhil Nair =====-----=====-----===== Notice: The information contained in this e-mail message and/or attachments to it may contain confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, use, review, distribution, printing or copying of the information contained in this e-mail message and/or attachments to it are strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us by reply e-mail or telephone and immediately and permanently delete the message and any attachments. Thank you </pre> Akhil Nair 2013-03-06T08:11:10 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pim/2941 <pre>Hi, here is finally a draft agenda. Please speak up if there are any issues. Stig pim wg meeting 9-11 Friday March 15th, 2013 Title Presenter Minutes ==================================================================== WG Status Chairs 10 draft-zzp-pim-rfc4601-update-survey-report-00 Chairs 5 draft-ietf-pim-explicit-tracking-05 H. Asaeda 10 draft-ietf-pim-drlb-02 T. Eckert 10 draft-asaeda-pim-mldproxy-multif-01 H. Asaeda 10 draft-contreras-multimob-multiple-upstreams-01 C.J.B. Cano 10 draft-zhang-pim-multi-upstream-igmp-mld-proxy-00 S. Gao 10 Unfortunately the draft is so far only available at this link. https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6D0eGbv_V4rVTY3Wk55TmpYejA/edit?usp=sharing draft-liu-multimob-igmp-mld-wireless-mobile-03 M. McBride 5 draft-asghar-pim-explicit-rpf-vector-01 T. Eckert 15 draft-zhou-pim-vrrp-01 T. Eckert 15 draft-arango-pim-join-attributes-for-lisp-00.txt S. Venaas 10 draft-venaas-pim-hierarchicaljoinattr-00.txt S. Venaas 10 </pre> Stig Venaas 2013-03-01T21:12:04 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pim/2940 <pre> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Protocol Independent Multicast Working Group of the IETF. Title : Protocol Independent Multicast DR Load Balancing Author(s) : Yiqun Cai Sri Vallepalli Heidi Ou Andy Green Filename : draft-ietf-pim-drlb-02.txt Pages : 14 Date : 2013-02-25 Abstract: On a multi-access network such as an Ethernet, one of the PIM routers is elected as a Designated Router (DR). The PIM DR has two roles in the PIM protocol. On the first hop network, the PIM DR is responsible for registering an active source to the RP if the group is operated in PIM SM. On the last hop network, the PIM DR is responsible for tracking local multicast listeners and forwarding traffic to these listeners if the group is operated in PIM SM/SSM/DM. In this document, we propose a modification to the PIM protocol that allows more than one of these last hop routers to be selected so that the forwarding load can be distributed to and handled among these routers. A router responsible for forwarding for a particular group is called a Group Designated Router (GDR). The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pim-drlb There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pim-drlb-02 A diff from the previous version is available at: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-pim-drlb-02 Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ </pre> internet-drafts< at >ietf.org 2013-02-25T23:07:34 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pim/2938 <pre> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Protocol Independent Multicast Working Group of the IETF. Title : IGMP/MLD-Based Explicit Membership Tracking Function for Multicast Routers Author(s) : Hitoshi Asaeda Filename : draft-ietf-pim-explicit-tracking-05.txt Pages : 10 Date : 2013-02-25 Abstract: This document describes the IGMP/MLD-based explicit membership tracking function for multicast routers supporting IGMPv3/MLDv2. The explicit tracking function contributes to saving network resources and fast leaves (i.e. shortening leave latency). The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pim-explicit-tracking There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pim-explicit-tracking-05 A diff from the previous version is available at: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-pim-explicit-tracking-05 Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ </pre> internet-drafts< at >ietf.org 2013-02-25T15:54:33 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pim/2937 <pre>Hi folks, I've submitted our revised draft of multiple upstream interface support for IGMP/MLD proxy. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-asaeda-pim-mldproxy-multif-01 I believe this revision improves a lot from the previous one. Please take a look at this and give us your comments. Thank you very much. Regards, -- Hitoshi Asaeda p.s. I'll inform this draft to homenet as well, to seek comments. </pre> Hitoshi Asaeda 2013-02-25T10:42:47 Search the mailing list at Gmane query http://search.gmane.org/?group=$group=gmane.ietf.pim