Subject: RE: PIM draft minutes from Oslo

From: Ravi Shekhar <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 11:58:10 -0400

> Issue #2 can be resolved by having the implementors agreeing to accept
> registers with checksum over the entire inner packet while generating
> registers over the header only. As a way for all to migrate into a
> single algorithm. This was also resolved a long time ago outside
> the spec.

  Doesnt this leave the other side of the problem still open? That is
  old implementations will drop the register packets generated by 
  new implementations (with checksum calculated only over register header). 
  NULL encapsulated Registers could be one possible way of by-passing 
  this problem as there wont be any data to calculate checksum over. 
  Possibly some option in group-RP mapping distribution to indicate the 
  kind of checksum an RP accepts could be utilised too. 
  - Ravi Shekhar.

---

From: Liming Wei <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 10:53:53 -0700 (PDT)

> X-SMAP-Received-From: outside
> From: Ravi Shekhar <[email-masked]>
> 

Ravi, it is funny that you said these, and I am quite sympathetic
about what you want to happen. I have made attempts/arguments to make
the spec consistent with some old implementations in such
'non-essential places', but didn't insist because I thought the spec
should not be compromised with existing implementations.

At this moment, introducing these would present more opportunities to
have protocol errors, no matter how innocent the new rules
look. Besides, the PIMv2 spec is "long-lived" in the sense it won't be
obsoleted long after many old implementations are..

-Liming