Subject: RE: [pim] San Francisco PIM WG meeting minutes

From: Cormier Chris-ACC125 <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 12:28:38 -0600

two cents on BSR flooding out IIF.

I still believe that this should be optional. I would say that there are
more cases where we know for sure what our RPF to BSR will be than cases
where there will be inconsistent RPF routes. The bootstrap packet is bloated
as it is, any solution that would "require" more copies of this message
would not be a good thing.

-Chris Cormier

"2. Mark Handley on PIM BSR flooding problem on LANs with inconsistent
   RPF information across different routers.
   Change of rule is to forward BSM out all interfaces including
   the RPF interface where the BSM was received on."
_______________________________________________
pim mailing list
[email-masked]
http://catarina.usc.edu/mailman/listinfo/pim

---

From: Mark Handley <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 12:32:31 -0800

>   the RPF interface where the BSM was received on."

I think we had consensus at the meeting on making sending out of the
IIF optional.  I believe it should default to on so that it works by
default, but I'm fine with people disabling it where it's safe and the
bandwidth causes an issue.

 - Mark

---

From: Liming Wei <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 13:54:11 -0800 (PST)

Chris,

You just reminded me that there were suggestions during the meeting
that the rule could be changed to RPF only on the interface, but not
the RPF neighbor. Mark countered with the potential exponential
growth of duplicates in cascad d topologies with parallel paths sharing
multiple LANs over multiple hops. I quesitoned whether using holddown
timers would solve that problem, but don't remember what Mark responded.

The minute is too short to capture the whole presentation. Mark, can
you post your slides online somewhere ? In short, the primary goal was
to "fix" this blackholing of BSM's with as little change to the protocol
as possible (also as backward compatible  as possible). Of course,
different people may have different ideas of what "simple" and "little"
translate into.

-Liming
---------
> From: Cormier Chris-ACC125 <[email-masked]>
>

---

From: Tom Pusateri <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 14:04:37 -0800

Actually, anyone who presented slides yesterday needs to send them
to me for submission to the minutes. Please do so right away.

Thanks,
Tom

---

From: Mark Handley <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 17:28:12 -0800

>to me for submission to the minutes. Please do so right away.

http://www.icir.org/mjh/tmp/bsr-sf.pdf
http://www.icir.org/mjh/tmp/bsr-sf.ppt

 - Mark

---

From: SUZUKI Shinsuke <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 11:08:04 +0900

>>>>> On Wed, 19 Mar 2003 14:04:37 -0800
>>>>> [email-masked](Tom Pusateri)  said:

> to me for submission to the minutes. Please do so right away.

Here's jinmei-san's presentation (converted from magicpoint to html).
	http://www.kame.net/~suz/pim-upstream-detection/index.html

Thanks,
----
SUZUKI, Shinsuke @ Hitachi / KAME Project
_______________________________________________
pim mailing list
[email-masked]
http://catarina.usc.edu/mailman/listinfo/pim

---

From: JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2003 13:04:07 +0900

>>>>> On Thu, 20 Mar 2003 11:08:04 +0900, 
>>>>> SUZUKI Shinsuke <[email-masked]> said:

> 	http://www.kame.net/~suz/pim-upstream-detection/index.html

A pdf version is also available at:
http://www.jinmei.org/mgp/ietf56-pim/pim-upstream-detection.pdf

					JINMEI, Tatuya
					Communication Platform Lab.
					Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp.
					[email-masked]
_______________________________________________
pim mailing list
[email-masked]
http://catarina.usc.edu/mailman/listinfo/pim