[magma] Question about proxy implemenation in RFC 4605

Kunal Shah <kunal.shah@ericsson.com> Sat, 30 October 2010 00:44 UTC

Return-Path: <kunal.shah@ericsson.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 A57013A679C for <magma@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 17:44:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.500, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
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 gplnLhLy1hbZ for <magma@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 17:44:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from imr3.ericy.com (imr3.ericy.com [198.24.6.13]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2622D3A657C for <magma@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 17:44:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from eusaamw0712.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.181]) by imr3.ericy.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o9U0kbGN030600 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for <magma@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 19:46:37 -0500
Received: from EUSAACMS0703.eamcs.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.63]) by eusaamw0712.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.181]) with mapi; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 20:46:36 -0400
From: Kunal Shah <kunal.shah@ericsson.com>
To: "magma@ietf.org" <magma@ietf.org>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 20:46:35 -0400
Thread-Topic: Question about proxy implemenation in RFC 4605
Thread-Index: Act3y+dEzA46tWwmR6yuBZkXU/iNeA==
Message-ID: <4FD1E7CD248BF84F86BD4814EDDDBCC150E72D61AE@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_4FD1E7CD248BF84F86BD4814EDDDBCC150E72D61AEEUSAACMS0703e_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 30 Oct 2010 09:06:44 -0700
Subject: [magma] Question about proxy implemenation in RFC 4605
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: Sat, 30 Oct 2010 00:44:44 -0000

Hi all,

According to RFC 4605, a router creates a membership database after merging the subscriptions on individual interfaces. Lets say that 3 IGMPv3 capable interfaces are as follows:

Interface 1 has host reporting Include S1 -> I(S1)
Interface 2 has host reporting Exclude S2 -> E(0,S2)
Interface 3 has host reporting Exclude nothing -> E(0,0)

For a device doing IGMPv3 proxy, the final membership record for group G is (G, EXCLUDE, NULL). Now lets say the host on interface 3 goes away, because of which the subscription on interface 3 would expire and there wont be any IGMPv3 state on interface 3.  How would the new membership record for PROXY be calculated?? The RFC does not suggest any way to do this. Would IGMP process have to go through each interface again and then recompute the new membership record?? This would be very inefficient especially if there are multiple interfaces.
Is there a better way to recompute the new membership record??


Thanks
Kunal