Re: [magma] Question about IGMP host implementation

[Hitoshi Asaeda <[e-mail]>]

>>         I think GTSM does solve the issue of forwarding IGMP messages but as
>>         you mentioned its only for unicast.
>>
>>         Till now, I have not seen any implementation using Unicast
>>         destination address for IGMP messages. So I am not sure if someone
>>         will really be interested in this work.
>>
>>         May be there are some legacy or customized implementation which I am
>>         not aware of and we need to see if these people would be interested
>>         in this.,
> 
> I know one implementation at least. But note that even if no one sends
> them, the RFC says they should be accepted. So we do have a problem if
> someone intentionally spoofs unicast packet.
> 
> If almost no one sends them, then changing to GTSM will be easier.

I think using unicast query is not well defined and considered in
rfc3376 and 3810.
Although it would be useful for some environment, e.g. resource
sensitive wireless link, it may cause some security concern. And also,
unicast query is not used standalone. Multicast query must be also
coexist.
Please check Appendix A. in;
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-multimob-igmp-mld-tuning-01

Regards,
--
Hitoshi Asaeda

p.s. I'd appreciate any comment for above draft. Please post your
comment to the multimob ML if you have.