Re: [pim] Rtgdir last call review of draft-ietf-pim-igmp-mld-proxy-yang-08

Hi Hitoshi,

Thanks a lot for your clarification. 

BR/Hongji

-----Original Message-----
From: Hitoshi Asaeda <asaeda@ieee.org> 
Sent: 2022年12月16日 10:11
To: Hongji Zhao <hongji.zhao=40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>; rtg-dir@ietf.org; draft-ietf-pim-igmp-mld-proxy-yang.all@ietf.org; last-call@ietf.org; pim@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [pim] Rtgdir last call review of draft-ietf-pim-igmp-mld-proxy-yang-08

Hi,

> For example, group-address  "233.252.0.23" has two source-addresses, which are 192.0.2.1 and 192.0.3.1. The 192.0.2.1 is include mode, and the 192.0.3.1 is in exclude mode.

INCLUDE and EXCLUDE modes does not coexist in a single multicast address. So above explanation seems wrong.
In your example, if you register 192.0.2.1 with INCLUDE, the application using the group-address 233.252.0.23 only receives content sent from 192.0.2.1(so that content sent from 192.0.3.1 is not received). If you register 192.0.3.1 with EXLUDE, the application using the group-address 233.252.0.23 receives content sent from all node except 192.0.3.1 (so that content sent from 192.0.2.1 is received).

Regards,

Hitoshi

> On Dec 15, 2022, at 16:42, Hongji Zhao <hongji.zhao=40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi Susan,
> 
> Thanks a lot for your comments.
> 
> "filter-mode" may be either INCLUDE or EXCLUDE. In INCLUDE mode, 
> reception of packets sent to the specified multicast address is requested *only* from those IP source addresses listed in the source-list parameter. In EXCLUDE mode, reception of packets sent to the given multicast address is requested from all IP source addresses *except* those listed in the source-list parameter [RFC 3376].
> 
> Generally there are more than one source-address for a group-address. Some source-addresses are include mode, and others are exclude mode.
> 
> For example, group-address  "233.252.0.23" has two source-addresses, which are 192.0.2.1 and 192.0.3.1. The 192.0.2.1 is include mode, and the 192.0.3.1 is in exclude mode.
> 
> 
> 
> BR/Hongji
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Susan Hares via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
> Sent: 2022年12月12日 23:09
> To: rtg-dir@ietf.org
> Cc: draft-ietf-pim-igmp-mld-proxy-yang.all@ietf.org; 
> last-call@ietf.org; pim@ietf.org
> Subject: Rtgdir last call review of 
> draft-ietf-pim-igmp-mld-proxy-yang-08
> 
> Reviewer: Susan Hares
> Review result: Has Issues
> 
> Revew: Document is readable and matches Yang for 1.1. 
> Status: 1 issue
> 
> Is it possible that deployments for the filter-mode be require both INCLUDE and EXCLUDE (see pages. 6, 7 and grouping state-group-attribute)? 
> 
> The text says "INCLUDE" or "EXCLUDE".  It would be good to know why the authors felt consider the "choice" statement where both "INCLUDE" and "EXCLUDE" would not be possible. 
> 
> Is this due to the normal situation for IGMP-proxy and MLD-Proxy in most deployed? 
> What would happen if both were needed?  How can choice be part of an augmentation? 
> 
> Also, this review did not consider the automated tools review. 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> pim mailing list
> pim@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim