IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [magma] Question about fast-leave implementation

"Beeram, Suresh KumarReddy" <sbeeram@hp.com> Fri, 29 October 2010 18:20 UTC

Return-Path: <sbeeram@hp.com>
X-Original-To: magma@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: magma@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22FEE3A68DB for <magma@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 11:20:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.298
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.298 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.700, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eL7Zc8rpUwLl for <magma@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 11:20:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from g6t0187.atlanta.hp.com (g6t0187.atlanta.hp.com [15.193.32.64]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F15DC3A6814 for <magma@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 11:20:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from G6W0641.americas.hpqcorp.net (g6w0641.atlanta.hp.com [16.230.34.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by g6t0187.atlanta.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8A35B2822E; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 18:22:21 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from G5W0325.americas.hpqcorp.net (16.228.8.67) by G6W0641.americas.hpqcorp.net (16.230.34.77) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.176.0; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 18:21:32 +0000
Received: from GVW1101EXC.americas.hpqcorp.net ([16.230.34.85]) by G5W0325.americas.hpqcorp.net ([16.228.8.67]) with mapi; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 18:21:32 +0000
From: "Beeram, Suresh KumarReddy" <sbeeram@hp.com>
To: Kunal Shah <kunal.shah@ericsson.com>, "magma@ietf.org" <magma@ietf.org>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 18:21:27 +0000
Thread-Topic: Question about fast-leave implementation
Thread-Index: Act28gKeg1WqzTs6TI21dKWgWWG0bQAo4F7A
Message-ID: <23E658492CE48649B5B5168EBC60387842C80B2890@GVW1101EXC.americas.hpqcorp.net>
References: <4FD1E7CD248BF84F86BD4814EDDDBCC150E72D5C2E@EUSAACMS0703.eamcs.ericsson.se>
In-Reply-To: <4FD1E7CD248BF84F86BD4814EDDDBCC150E72D5C2E@EUSAACMS0703.eamcs.ericsson.se>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_23E658492CE48649B5B5168EBC60387842C80B2890GVW1101EXCame_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [magma] Question about fast-leave implementation
X-BeenThere: magma@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multicast and Anycast Group Membership <magma.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/magma>, <mailto:magma-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/magma>
List-Post: <mailto:magma@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:magma-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/magma>, <mailto:magma-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 18:20:28 -0000

Hi Kunal,
Eventhough Fast-leave enabled on interface if no of hosts greater than one for particular group we need to send query..
Only difference with normal behavior was when no of hosts is only one. Then FL enabled interface immediately deletes
cache entry without sending Query

Apart from that no other reason to send out query on FL enabled interface..

Thanks
B Suresh Reddy
From: magma-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:magma-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Kunal Shah
Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 4:17 AM
To: magma@ietf.org
Subject: [magma] Question about fast-leave implementation

Hi all,

Is there any reason to send out a query in fast-leave is enabled on the interface?? Enabling fast-leave allows deleting the cache immediately on receiving a leave. If the cache is deleted immediately, hosts on the interface will see traffic loss, which makes me think that fast-leave is enabled when the interface is gauranteed to receive a leave when the last host goes away or there is only one host on the interface. So does it make any sense in sending out a query on receiving a leave if fast-leave is enabled??

Thanks
Kunal

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email