[pim] Registry for PIM message types

Stig Venaas <stig@venaas.com> Thu, 19 November 2009 00:42 UTC

Return-Path: <stig@venaas.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 9C6AB3A683E for <pim@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:42:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-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 RMEE5y7WxWvv for <pim@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:42:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ufisa.uninett.no (ufisa.uninett.no [IPv6:2001:700:1:2:158:38:152:126]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9167E3A6943 for <pim@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:42:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [IPv6:2001:420:1:fff:0:5efe:10.32.214.37] (unknown [IPv6:2001:420:1:fff:0:5efe:a20:d625]) by ufisa.uninett.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8F1B22182 for <pim@ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 01:42:52 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <4B049489.3010504@venaas.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:42:49 -0800
From: Stig Venaas <stig@venaas.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: pim@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [pim] Registry for PIM message types
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, 19 Nov 2009 00:42:56 -0000

It turns out there is no registry for PIM message types. The only thing
we got is PIMv1 types as part of the IGMP registry.

There is an almost complete list of message types in the sparse mode and
dense mode RFCs, but none of them actually define a registry. This means
there is no IANA list of PIM message types, and there are no rules for
how to define new ones.

I've just submitted a very simple draft that defines such a registry,
see http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-venaas-pim-registry-00.txt

Below are the types it defines (have I missed any?).

It also says that IETF review is needed for new message types. That
means an RFC is needed and it must go through IETF last call (which
means that standards track RFCs are automatically qualified, but also
other RFCs if we do an IETF last call). Do you think that is too strict?

Message types in draft:

    Type   Name                          Reference
    ----  ----------------------------  ---------------------
      0    Hello                         [RFC3973] [RFC4601]
      1    Register                      [RFC4601]
      2    Register Stop                 [RFC4601]
      3    Join/Prune                    [RFC3973] [RFC4601]
      4    Bootstrap                     [RFC4601]
      5    Assert                        [RFC3973] [RFC4601]
      6    Graft                         [RFC3973]
      7    Graft-Ack                     [RFC3973]
      8    Candidate RP Advertisement    [RFC4601]
      9    State Refresh                 [RFC3973]
     10    DF Election                   [RFC5015]

Stig