Re: [magma] Querier transition based on Group Specific Query?

"Kudachi, Deepak S" <> Tue, 31 January 2012 05:16 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9630721F8782 for <>; Mon, 30 Jan 2012 21:16:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.598
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Kg3mWqpfTz4g for <>; Mon, 30 Jan 2012 21:16:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC80021F8780 for <>; Mon, 30 Jan 2012 21:16:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F296438171; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 05:16:07 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 05:14:45 +0000
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 14.01.0289.001; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 05:14:45 +0000
From: "Kudachi, Deepak S" <>
To: Indranil Bhattacharya <>, "" <>
Thread-Topic: [magma] Querier transition based on Group Specific Query?
Thread-Index: AQHM38g3KfPuVF0jl0m5m3lCe7QS7JYl7HVQ
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 05:14:44 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_A73087BEA2747741B7965ACF956E50042E4F1D20G4W3219americas_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [magma] Querier transition based on Group Specific Query?
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multicast and Anycast Group Membership <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 05:16:09 -0000


I guess it should be All host Query which needs to be considered for querier election and not group specific query
Some vendors may support their own proprietary  features like forced fast leave in this case non querier may send  single
GSQ on specific port to find any host interested for that group this should not be considered for querier election.

RFC does not mention any thing about this AHQ/GSQ/GSSQ.(let me know if you find anything related to this).


From: [] On Behalf Of Indranil Bhattacharya
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 8:57 AM
Subject: [magma] Querier transition based on Group Specific Query?


   In the querier transition state machine, RFC 2236 only mentions 'Query' and does not specify GQ or GSQ. Can a querier transition take place based on GSQ? Or is it okay to for a querier to ignore GSQ? Can anyone please help me with this?