Subject: [magma] MSNIP draft comments

From: Karen Kimball <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 10:38:35 -0800 (PST)

Hello, MSNIP group,

I have some very small comments on the current MSNIP draft, most
editorial in nature. However, I am sending these two comments out
to the Magma group.

First, in section 4.2,  there is the comment, "The presence of an 
IGMP Querier differentiates between the first two cases, where the 
host is in a multicast routed network, and the third, where there
is no multicast routing."

In fact, an IGMP Querier may be a snooping switch and not a 
multicast router. If there is no other Querier on the network,
some device needs to be the Querier in order for IGMP to work
properly. Some Layer-2 switches will perform that function in 
that case.

Hence, my concern is that the presence of an IGMP Querier should 
not be assumed to distinguish the environments as noted above.
Rather, no assumption about multicast routing can be made in this
case. Perhaps this could be changed to something else, such as
the presence of PIM denoting multicast routers.

Second, although I see that this is also used in the SSM Overview
document, could we not use the notation of   232/8   to indicate
the SSM range?

I understand what 232.0.0.0/8 means. But 232/8 doesn't have any
meaning that I'm aware of. I initially took this to indicate
232.0.0.0 - 238.0.0.0 as being the SSM range.

I'll send the editorial comments directly to Bill & Brian.

Thanks,
	Karen Kimball
	[email-masked]

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