Subject: [pim] Join messages and the assert state machines

From: Pavlin Radoslavov <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 19:10:31 -0700

The PIM (S,G) assert state machine has a state transition that
happens whenever a Join message is received:
"We receive a Join(S,G) that has the Upstream Neighbor Address
field set to my primary IP address on interface I."
However, the corresponding text in the (*,G) assert state machine
says:
"We receive a Join(*,G) or a Join(*,*,RP(G)) that has the Upstream
Neighbor Address field set to my IP address on interface I."

Note that the the (*,G) text does not say "primary".
Is this an unintended omission, or in the (*,G) case the (*,G) Join
message's event will be applied even if the message uses a secondary
IP address for the Upstream Neighbor Address?

Similar mismatch exists in "Summary of Assert Rules and Rationale":
Rationale 6 says "... a Join(S,G) with an Upstream Neighbor Address
that is its primary IP address on that interface...", but Rationale
7 says "... a Join(*,G) or a Join(*,*,RP(G)) with an Upstream
Neighbor Address that is one of its addresses on that
interface...".

Thanks,
Pavlin

_______________________________________________
pim mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim