IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [pim] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-pim-group-rp-mapping-01.txt

"Andy Kessler (kessler)" <kessler@cisco.com> Thu, 16 July 2009 01:02 UTC

Return-Path: <kessler@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: pim@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pim@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A77333A6F96 for <pim@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Jul 2009 18:02:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 1Rm8UkH8msNp for <pim@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Jul 2009 18:02:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sj-iport-1.cisco.com (sj-iport-1.cisco.com [171.71.176.70]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCC723A69D6 for <pim@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Jul 2009 18:02:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEAOYYXkqrR7PD/2dsb2JhbAC4cYgjLAiQUgWCKB8IgTw
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.42,407,1243814400"; d="scan'208";a="214615352"
Received: from sj-dkim-3.cisco.com ([171.71.179.195]) by sj-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 16 Jul 2009 01:02:46 +0000
Received: from sj-core-1.cisco.com (sj-core-1.cisco.com [171.71.177.237]) by sj-dkim-3.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id n6G12k3w021768; Wed, 15 Jul 2009 18:02:46 -0700
Received: from xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-211.cisco.com [171.70.151.144]) by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n6G12kcg016963; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 01:02:46 GMT
Received: from xmb-sjc-215.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.169]) by xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 15 Jul 2009 18:02:46 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 18:02:44 -0700
Message-ID: <65B900A32A86DB4EBF57C0D07F9B2A9E018209F8@xmb-sjc-215.amer.cisco.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: RE: [pim] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-pim-group-rp-mapping-01.txt
Thread-Index: AcoFsSB4jiU/DRMIRbi5liDihPQqpw==
From: "Andy Kessler (kessler)" <kessler@cisco.com>
To: pim@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Jul 2009 01:02:46.0113 (UTC) FILETIME=[21657D10:01CA05B1]
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=1726; t=1247706166; x=1248570166; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim3002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=kessler@cisco.com; z=From:=20=22Andy=20Kessler=20(kessler)=22=20<kessler@cisco. com> |Subject:=20RE=3A=20[pim]=20I-D=20ACTION=3Adraft-ietf-pim-g roup-rp-mapping-01.txt |Sender:=20; bh=sWp6UL9g+ZZ92gmIfbz3ZuDm4O06zMvfexUMd+IuWA8=; b=FHfD/Ek7BjNBl5PEczEI1+rgK/WJcGNPAz3WDI1kddGEHmotrdTQA2mBaC jhv56e+corU5yoNVcnXwsAGVg9BTynJOnx48AzdefjF8/3pwzkH3ZHKYDdcG LUbbvN8egS;
Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-3; header.From=kessler@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim3002 verified; );
Cc: "Stig Venaas (svenaas)" <svenaas@cisco.com>, "Mike McBride (mmcbride)" <mmcbride@cisco.com>, Bharat Joshi <bharat_joshi@infosys.com>, David McWalter <DMcW@dataconnection.com>
Subject: Re: [pim] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-pim-group-rp-mapping-01.txt
X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast <pim.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim>, <mailto:pim-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pim>
List-Post: <mailto:pim@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pim-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim>, <mailto:pim-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2009 01:02:14 -0000

Hi, 

I was speaking to Stig and we came up with what we think is a 
workable compromise for the hash function. 

After steps 1-8 of the algorithm have been executed we have
taken into account all of these factors: 

 Embedded RP
 SSM Range, Dense mode config
 Static with override
 Longest match
 Bidir over SM
 Mapping Origin - BSR, Auto-rp, static, other

The only type of Group-to-RP mappings that can be left at that point is 
a few overlapping mappings from only one of BSR, Auto-RP, static, or 
other. 

Step 9 currently says to pick the highest IP address. Taking into
account
the hash function for BSR and the issues with implementing the hash
with Bidir, we can add a new step 9 for the hash:

9. If the remaining Group-to-RP mappings were learned through  
   BSR and the PIM Mode of the Group is 'PIM-SM' then the hash 
   function will be used to choose the RP. The RP with the highest 
   resulting hash value will be selected. 

   * If more than one RP has the same highest hash value we 
     continue with the algorithm with those Group-to-RP mappings.

   * If the remaining Group-to-RP mappings were NOT learned from BSR 
     we continue the algorithm with the next step

10. From the remaining set of Group-to-RP Mappings we will select the
    RP with the highest IP address.  This will serve as a final
    tiebreaker.


Then we can change section 9 which talks about "Migration to the new 
algorithm" to say that we will NOT remove the hash function and
therefore it will be backward compatible. 

Further, before the IETF meeting we will create an ascii flowchart of 
the algorithm and send it out to the list. 

Andy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email