Re: [magma] Question about IGMP host implementation

Indranil Bhattacharya <myselfindranil@gmail.com> Wed, 12 October 2011 08:35 UTC

Return-Path: <myselfindranil@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: magma@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: magma@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D73F921F84DF for <magma@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 01:35:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gXgQ4SMFE9ie for <magma@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 01:35:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wy0-f172.google.com (mail-wy0-f172.google.com [74.125.82.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1408921F84DB for <magma@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 01:35:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wyg24 with SMTP id 24so474196wyg.31 for <magma@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 01:35:43 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=iPPf2d4oKgR4Za5DFRoouMwb0MOEvz2Nu7IQlncyp+I=; b=Cj0U5gKhSN/HDedImVUFBCYAqBgckH7/vyUSEdny+gHzPA4BX/Dil4Oo3DUc87FHfd jJxNfbSME8qga7hFENh3g4CNjY5l/dPw394iTpSWS6SI/OASEZOXXIZfbpbxinZ9yI25 LGQJYeOkRdkiaMLu+xJfcPDpf7UOmR1n64ENg=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.216.210.216 with SMTP id u66mr2059536weo.49.1318408543122; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 01:35:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.216.39.80 with HTTP; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 01:35:43 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4FD1E7CD248BF84F86BD4814EDDDBCC151401F3936@EUSAACMS0703.eamcs.ericsson.se>
References: <4FD1E7CD248BF84F86BD4814EDDDBCC151401F3936@EUSAACMS0703.eamcs.ericsson.se>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 14:05:43 +0530
Message-ID: <CAAaur94CuNmHY398Uj6K1JLkrDjEQxHEvjyqCkVU7+EKFwg8uQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Indranil Bhattacharya <myselfindranil@gmail.com>
To: Kunal Shah <kunal.shah@ericsson.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e6dab520e1b72704af15e879
Cc: "magma@ietf.org" <magma@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [magma] Question about IGMP host implementation
X-BeenThere: magma@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multicast and Anycast Group Membership <magma.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/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: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 08:35:44 -0000

Hi Kunal,

             Yes it should. The scenario that I have in mind is a switch
whose mrouter interface is in vlanA and igmp joins are received on an
interface in vlanB. In this case, query coming from vlanA(different subnet)
has to be answered by hosts in vlanB.

Thanks,
Indranil

On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 6:08 AM, Kunal Shah <kunal.shah@ericsson.com> wrote:

>  Hi all,
>
> Can an IGMPv2 host respond to a general query originated from a subnet
> other then its own?? RFC 2236 states:
>
> ""query received" occurs when the host receives either a valid
>      General Membership Query message, or a valid Group-Specific
>      Membership Query message.  To be valid, the Query message must be
>      at least 8 octets long, and have a correct IGMP checksum.  The
>      group address in the IGMP header must either be zero (a General
>      Query) or a valid multicast group address (a Group-Specific Query)"
>
> There is no requirement for the source address to be on the same subnet as
> the host.
>
> Thanks,
> Kunal
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> magma mailing list
> magma@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/magma
>
>