Has the group considered a Bier model for multicast in the home?

On 2/20/15, 9:41 AM, "Toerless Eckert" <[email protected]> wrote:

>I have seen more L2 switches that have broken IGMP/MLD snooping than
>working ones. I am not aware of real proliferation of PIM snooping.
>Snooping in transit LANs with PIM is a bad idea anyhow, and i have
>tried to steer any customer who asked me away from it.
>
>Bidir-PIM makes snooping particularily difficult. For once
>you have to track DF-winner election messages (difficult) and
>secondly you have to then flood all multicast to all DF winners
>because you don't know which group-range is served by which RP.
>
>IMHO, there is never enough multicast to justify this snooping complexity.
>The only thing to worry about is what packets to send out from a router
>to ensure the snooping doesn't screw up the traffic flow.
>
>I would be surprised to find equipemnt that does PIM snooping by default.
>
>So, i'd recommend to a homenet router:
>
>-> even if you don't do PIM, send out PIM Hellos. This should
>   effectively make all stupid "enterprise class" IGMP/MLD snooping
>   switches (that often have broken IGMP/MLD snooping) send
>   you all multicast traffic (inhibits snooping).
>
>-> Still send MLD/IGMP memberships to get traffic through the
>   L2 home equipment that has likely never heard about PIM.
>   I'd guess that eg: powerline equipment falls into this
>   category.
>
>Cheers
>    Toerless
>
>On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 11:04:41AM +1100, Andrew Mcgregor wrote:
>> Why?  PIM and MLD snooping are pretty standard on very low-end
>>enterprise
>> switches, which will be next year's midrange consumer models.  If the
>> dumb-as-rocks stuff goes away, that would generally make people happier.
>> 
>> On 20 February 2015 at 05:22, Mikael Abrahamsson <[email protected]>
>>wrote:
>> 
>> > On Thu, 19 Feb 2015, Ted Lemon wrote:
>> >
>> >  On Feb 19, 2015, at 1:08 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson <[email protected]>
>>wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> I would like my router-to-router links to not have a lot of hosts in
>> >>> them if I can avoid it.
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> Why is that?
>> >>
>> >
>> > If we're going to be routing multicast within the home, we're most
>>likely
>> > going to have to use some kind of variant of PIM. Asking the L2
>>switches
>> > people connect to the router to support both PIM and MLD snooping
>>seem like
>> > it might be asking too much.
>> >
>> > I might be wrong though.
>> >
>> > --
>> > Mikael Abrahamsson    email: [email protected]
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > homenet mailing list
>> > [email protected]
>> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
>> >
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Andrew McGregor | SRE | [email protected] | +61 4 1071 2221
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> homenet mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
>
>
>-- 
>---
>Toerless Eckert, [email protected]
>
>_______________________________________________
>homenet mailing list
>[email protected]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
>

_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet

Reply via email to