Re: [pim] Request for Review: draft-nandy-pim-static-mcast-distribution-trees

[Mike McBride <[e-mail]>]

Perhaps draft-ietf-mboned-multicast-yang-model. This would be worthy of a
discussion in pim/mboned in Yokohama. I'll make sure we don't drop it.

mike

On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 1:50 PM Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Do we have a YANG model for multicast operational state already?
>
> Either way, it seems that the same model could/should be used for both
> operational state and configuration.
>
>
>
> Jeffrey
>
>
>
>
>
> Juniper Business Use Only
>
> *From:* pim <[e-mail]> *On Behalf Of * Michael McBride
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 23, 2023 8:50 PM
> *To:* Anil Raj <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; pim-chairs <
> [e-mail]>
> *Cc:* Mike McBride <[e-mail]>; [e-mail];
> [e-mail]
> *Subject:* Re: [pim] Request for Review:
> draft-nandy-pim-static-mcast-distribution-trees
>
>
>
> *[External Email. Be cautious of content]*
>
>
>
> Hi Anil,
>
>
>
> Thank you for bringing this to the list. We discussed this a bit at 114.
> Basically the proposal is to standardize static mroutes which are extended
> to including forwarding location along with a redistribution option.
>
>
>
> It was mentioned during the meeting that vendor cli has provided these
> options for some time and perhaps this is something that should be
> addressed in a yang model. But that we may first need to come up with a
> good use case to energize the wg to work on it. Acee confirmed that there
> is a static routing yang model and it was considerable work to include the
> multiple vendor options.
>
>
>
> If anyone cares to chime in please do and, if there is interest, perhaps
> we can work on a yang model. Please consider also presenting at our
> upcoming 116 meeting to discuss further.
>
>
>
> mike
>
>
>
> *From:* pim <[e-mail]> *On Behalf Of *Anil Raj
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 1, 2023 1:04 AM
> *To:* [e-mail]; pim-chairs <[e-mail]>
> *Cc:* Mike McBride <[e-mail]>; [e-mail];
> [e-mail]
> *Subject:* [pim] Request for Review:
> draft-nandy-pim-static-mcast-distribution-trees
>
>
>
> Greetings PIM reviewers,
>
>
>
> I’d like to request a review on the following draft:
>
>
> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-nandy-pim-static-mcast-distribution-trees-00.txt
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Fwww.ietf.org*2Farchive*2Fid*2Fdraft-nandy-pim-static-mcast-distribution-trees-00.txt&data=05*7C01*7Cmichael.mcbride*40futurewei.com*7Ca1540b3c7d344446a9ce08db04333e97*7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc*7C1*7C1*7C638108390381464267*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C1000*7C*7C*7C&sdata=7mk2t3jGPmkn9W3SoBVzEN2Wn1Ua2w4qQGtKHm7x3g0*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJQ!!NEt6yMaO-gk!DceLkCGvmCoRm0qpZeDK1V3yaXEHarZ9DNUQ9bcBIie80vtfbej0v-bNWGMBceL-MKb9Zrb7rULwnnZsBSUAYYa40imUZQ$>
>
>
>
> Kindly share your comments.
>
>
>
> Summary/Abstract:
>
> This document specifies the Static Provision of Multicast route as an
> alternate to Layer 3 Multicast protocols like PIM-SM (Protocol Independent
> Multicast - Sparse Mode), PIM SSM (Source-Specific Multicast), or PIM BIDI
> (Bidirectional). It works like a standalone Multicast Route provisioning
> feature that can interoperate with other dynamic Multicast protocols like
> PIM-SM or with L2 protocols like IGMP (Internet Group Management Protocol)
> and MLD (Multicast Listener Discovery). Additionally, the statically
> provisioned multicast routes can be distributed into a PIM network as
> joins, enabling integration with dynamic multicast networks as well.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Anil Raj
>
>
>
>
>