Subject: RE: [magma] MAGMA Minutes for IETF 56

From: "Dave Thaler" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 10:45:36 -0800

[...]
> Open issues
> 
> What variables should have read / write access ?
> 
> Discussion on this with Dave Thaler - variables that are adjustable
> should have read write access.

Change to:
Discussion on this with Dave Thaler - variables that the IGMP RFC says
should be configurable, may have read write access.

[Note from opsarea meeting: MIBs are no longer required to support
read-write access, but it's fine if the WG still wants to allow it]

> ----
[...]
> Bill Nickless - Why does this API include the interface ?
> Dave Thaler - You can always pass a zero (?) if you do not know what
> interface to use. It just supports the use of a specific interface if
> you need to do that.

Delete "(?)", it's correct.

> Bill Fenner - since all of the other functions contain buffer lengths,
> you need it here for the group as well.
> 
> We will add the socklent for the group list

Change "socklent" to "socklen_t"

[...]
> Audience member - Question about interface index = 0
> Dave Thaler - It is illegal for interface index to start with zero.
> That is always the case and was intended to
> 

Ending is missing.  Just delete the line starting with "That is..."

> Brian Haberman - I think that we should put this to the list and
> 

Ending is missing again.

> ---
[...]
> 2.) Customers have requested that hosts be configurable to force
IGMPv2
> use even though the RFC would use IGMPv3
> 
> - SSM would not work anyway
> - This requries manual configuration on every node.
> 
> Isadore K. - If the IGMPv3 queries do not go through, then there is
> still a problem

Fix spelling of Isidor's name. :)

> 3.) Disable IGMP snooping entirely.
> 
> Does this affect the snooping draft ?
> 
> John Zwiebel - Let's just fix this and not do kludgy work-arounds.
> Dave Thaler - the problem is that there are not too many switches

Change last line above to:
Dave Thaler - the problem is that there are not very many IGMPv3-capable
switches yet.

> Bill Nickless - there may be a hole in the spec if the host and the
> router cannot tell what
> 
Missing ending again.

> Dave Thaler - The draft says that you
> - flood any unrecognized IGMP
> - flood the data to router ports (configurable to all ports) if there
> are no reports for a group
> - doesn't cover the case where the report was received
> 
> This problem should be at least documented if not fixed if possible in
> the snooping draft.
> 
> Brian Haberman - Another possible option
> Joel Jaeggli - this is an existing problem not a potential problem, so
> adding new features does not help much.

Actually I believe his point was that adding new behavior _for the
switch_ does not help.  The point was that you can only specify behavior
for
the host or the router, since the problem occurs when the switch is not
upgraded.

Maybe change the note to:
Joel Jaeggli - this is a problem with existing switches not a potential
problem, so specifying new behavior for the switch does not help much.

> -----

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