On Tuesday, September 20, 2011 05:34:34 AM Pavel Lunin wrote: > > What's wrong with PIM? > > http://books.google.com/books?id=2lxbaQ-VN8sC&lpg=PP1&hl= > ru&pg=PA307#v=onepage&q&f=false:)
Exactly! Don't get me wrong, PIM is still used in NG-MVPN networks, but only at the edges, i.e., at the Sender PE router when communicating with the source network, and at the Receiver PE router toward the FTTH network (as part of the IGMP infrastructure). > Let me guys ask a reverse question. Is anyone here using > draft-rosen in production? Would appreciate you > feedback. Is it as dreadful as it's sometimes said? :) > Mark? Nope, no Rosen here :-). I studied it many times back and found it too complicated that we never deployed it. It helped that there wasn't any urgent need for it at the time to. It so happened that when we then wanted to implement Multicast, NG-MVPN was available. Does replacing PIM with BGP add complexity in BGP? Perhaps. But from our experience over the years running NG-MVPN, it's actually not causing any major issues. Cheers, Mark.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
