Subject: [pim] Fragmentation of J/P packets

From: "Bakar" <[email-masked]>
Date: 16 Jul 2002 05:42:16 -0000

Hi *,

  draft-v5, says the followin in section 4.10.5.2

"If only N (S,G,rpt) Prune entries fit into a maximum-sized Join / 
Prune
message, but the router has more than N (S,G,rpt) Prunes to add, 
then
the router MUST choose to include the first N (numerically 
smallest in
network byte order) IP addresses. "

   I think this is a "semantic fragmentaion".

   Then as per the End of Message processing the (S,G,rpt) prunes 
which were not included, would be changed to NoInfo state. Then 
when we receive the (S,G,rpt) prunes in the next semantic 
fragment, we again have to wait for the prune pending timer expiry 
to prune of this oif.

   I guess leaving this to "IP fragmentation" is a better idea. 
PIM should do "semantic fragmentation" if for that G the packet 
size still exceeds MTU, it should be left to IP fragmentation.

   Your views please.

regards,
Bakar
_________________________________________________________
There is always a better job for you at Monsterindia.com.
Go now http://monsterindia.rediff.com/jobs

_______________________________________________
pim mailing list
[email-masked]
http://catarina.usc.edu/mailman/listinfo/pim

---

From: Mark Handley <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 09:23:46 -0700

>size still exceeds MTU, it should be left to IP fragmentation.

No, this isn't semantic fragmentation.  It's simply specifying the
overload behaviour - if there are so many (S,G,rpt) prunes you can fit
in a J/P message (even with IP fragmentation), then PIM provides no
solution.  The rule above just specifies the correct overload
behaviour in this case.

 - Mark