Subject: RE: [pim] Update_SPTbit(S,G)

From: "Ju, Yu" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 17:29:14 -0400

Where in the draft say that? Please point it out to me.

Yu

> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Huang [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 5:24 PM
> To: Ju, Yu; [email-masked]
> Subject: RE: [pim] Update_SPTbit(S,G)
> 
> 
> SPTbit(S,G) will be set to FALSE when JoinDesired(S,G) becomes FALSE.
> This will allow the switch back from the SPT tree to RPT tree.
> 
> James Huang
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ju, Yu [mailto:[email-masked]]
> > Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 2:15 PM
> > To: [email-masked]
> > Subject: [pim] Update_SPTbit(S,G)
> > 
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > When a packet arrives, the (S,G) SPTbit is updated as follows:
> > 
> >      void
> >      Update_SPTbit(S,G,iif) {
> >        if ( iif == RPF_interface(S)
> >              AND JoinDesired(S,G) == TRUE
> >              AND ( DirectlyConnected(S) == TRUE
> >                    OR RPF_interface(S) != RPF_interface(RP)
> >                    OR inherited_olist(S,G,rpt) == NULL
> >                    OR RPF'(S,G) == RPF'(*,G) ) ) {
> >           Set SPTbit(S,G) to TRUE
> >        }
> >      }
> > 
> > So if the condition is not satisfied, the SPTbit(S,G) is not 
> > set to TRUE and
> > keep its previous value which could be TRUE. 
> > So once SPTbit(S,G) is set to TRUE, it will never be set back 
> > to FALSE until
> > (S,G) state times out.  Am I right? Is this why PIM-SM does 
> > not provide a
> > mechanism to switch back from SPT tree to RPT tree?
> > 
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > Yu
> > _______________________________________________
> > pim mailing list
> > [email-masked]
> > http://catarina.usc.edu/mailman/listinfo/pim
> > 
> 
_______________________________________________
pim mailing list
[email-masked]
http://catarina.usc.edu/mailman/listinfo/pim