IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [pim] [MBONED] IGMPv3 backward compatibility issue killing SSM

Leonard Giuliano <lenny@juniper.net> Wed, 20 March 2024 21:36 UTC

Return-Path: <lenny@juniper.net>
X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31973C14F6A4; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 14:36:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.105
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.105 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=juniper.net header.b="ElsUNNkO"; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=juniper.net header.b="Nm/MoJAm"
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wdiRCcT3W8Fw; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 14:36:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0a-00273201.pphosted.com (mx0a-00273201.pphosted.com [208.84.65.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 95D34C14F6EC; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 14:36:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0108158.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-00273201.pphosted.com (8.17.1.24/8.17.1.24) with ESMTP id 42KKGHFS020748; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 14:35:52 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=juniper.net; h= date:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id:references :mime-version:content-type; s=PPS1017; bh=hA1a3fMlXzpQuRpaOxa8zE pPxqbZ2rHj0K8kkCjHR9k=; b=ElsUNNkOn9zAee2eitZ74rp0TQexnR59f0oGzB 9/qtiys7TBBSzHkjinuVDUA0WJPxcleWu7F4+Ox4WbBkobCiNhcpHLboRPMcIJkL XvN8MGDIH0LBud2kwJKuANL1lJtfUrIVMiy1ITxSwl5cfhgoOUrDArugFEYN3v7k S2WJaiZJLxUHwH9iu+Q8d8iLQhUpB4GLsG9ZhC7AHV3XP3KqmyDDRXhJGicdC+2W zNUJfpOnqRQ7c/RWSazVfEqQABGAOILn55jMjUVor8JF8Bpardq/wGDDuO0jEJFP bn4n2hvgB7vpJNBYshN0cp8xlqi9979zJTZ6E5yOMRD1F1Kg==
Received: from byapr05cu005.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-westusazlp17011008.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.93.1.8]) by mx0a-00273201.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3ww74krp86-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 20 Mar 2024 14:35:51 -0700 (PDT)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=GI6TZjwAP+PIcPBlh5Xel7bM4QmkWGdLJVrMsUAGb70qpeaudSs2ts7dnFS4hN7T/mQnn33b5S6Wq2EYcsoewxM6oENFhDzBanxCs8HIJuNeb8tMLRhOM9Ct31SVLz4rVpCnzU5yEEOp4q+ll6M+/v64Q1Um6nNS6MW5BjVFTy6vldsUNl0eVs9zBu+rrnoEaOC5t1xX1ilsblO10DVqmy0IDlLbrgkYlDxorRE2EZ0WORHb8AkmnlrMpqFXzuMHBieMczmN2kJu09Tu64SBJNw+1DRP//qH6XrbgdDRy0Kyqwp50qnoWYcztuhSiIwzaLYTD+ANmQekjRsYCoNzCw==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=hA1a3fMlXzpQuRpaOxa8zEpPxqbZ2rHj0K8kkCjHR9k=; b=mcN3cX8tRLjS7rNocs965a2HsO0ekCiJ2BBqw0Nm0S4hYmgWN991BSP6ey7O4+jlnmV4Y0uKUmxaSTH5bm/g8mflkJr840e1SCyZbwgWObaVMGh+/MxI7tt+4C3B/KcL57H106bl4oeJ9v5TfN8OZy6Ea6mrGsJ5WQ0YkIbOq20SUHTYeK8mXc4jwZ3TV8LFq8jHQGQttU7yzXMaNY+nktDzro3LuElWwIvUH9Y2Nqx8zT6+KS2b6PZj9egCEso+W55KWdYsSO5kHJZ6Q+UKtnstiGOeDJwAq+EA/KHhi/vHvoSRyRCpQ9sMNA1MCAIrQzSs60gapeOcBmUKdPAKtQ==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=softfail (sender ip is 66.129.239.15) smtp.rcpttodomain=fenron.com smtp.mailfrom=juniper.net; dmarc=fail (p=reject sp=reject pct=100) action=oreject header.from=juniper.net; dkim=none (message not signed); arc=none (0)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=juniper.net; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=hA1a3fMlXzpQuRpaOxa8zEpPxqbZ2rHj0K8kkCjHR9k=; b=Nm/MoJAmrvv738Y7xp8J5EIJQykV5A6H/yqfd8U9b1C8erex2AAsXf0O7P/BxQDn+9ZytuMTwgO+2jEHjdScz+trdqKPg+Tzzv8+0Oi+bAUuNk4H5MyyjCArd2ScZJ6ALzh0SbJGaIW/GKkOtWeKp//jAu9fbZjbqm8FQwlWk/k=
Received: from BY5PR16CA0002.namprd16.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a03:1a0::15) by SA0PR05MB7388.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:806:be::20) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.7386.27; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 21:35:49 +0000
Received: from CO1PEPF000066EA.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a03:1a0:cafe::a3) by BY5PR16CA0002.outlook.office365.com (2603:10b6:a03:1a0::15) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.7386.27 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 21:35:48 +0000
X-MS-Exchange-Authentication-Results: spf=softfail (sender IP is 66.129.239.15) smtp.mailfrom=juniper.net; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=fail action=oreject header.from=juniper.net;
Received-SPF: SoftFail (protection.outlook.com: domain of transitioning juniper.net discourages use of 66.129.239.15 as permitted sender)
Received: from p-exchfe-eqx-02.jnpr.net (66.129.239.15) by CO1PEPF000066EA.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.167.249.5) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.7409.10 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 21:35:48 +0000
Received: from p-exchbe-eqx-01.jnpr.net (10.104.9.14) by p-exchfe-eqx-02.jnpr.net (10.104.9.17) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.4; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 16:35:48 -0500
Received: from p-exchbe-eqx-01.jnpr.net (10.104.9.14) by p-exchbe-eqx-01.jnpr.net (10.104.9.14) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.4; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 16:35:48 -0500
Received: from p-mailhub01.juniper.net (10.104.20.6) by p-exchbe-eqx-01.jnpr.net (10.104.9.14) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.4 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 16:35:47 -0500
Received: from eng-mail03.juniper.net (eng-mail03.juniper.net [10.108.22.11]) by p-mailhub01.juniper.net (8.14.4/8.11.3) with ESMTP id 42KLZkq8020735; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 14:35:46 -0700 (envelope-from lenny@juniper.net)
Received: from eng-mail03.juniper.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eng-mail03.juniper.net (8.16.1/8.14.9) with ESMTPS id 42KLZnJ4045486 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 20 Mar 2024 14:35:50 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from lenny@juniper.net)
Received: from localhost (lenny@localhost) by eng-mail03.juniper.net (8.16.1/8.16.1/Submit) with ESMTP id 42KLZiOB045483; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 14:35:44 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from lenny@juniper.net)
X-Authentication-Warning: eng-mail03.juniper.net: lenny owned process doing -bs
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2024 14:35:44 -0700
From: Leonard Giuliano <lenny@juniper.net>
To: Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net>
CC: Stig Venaas <stig@venaas.com>, "Holland, Jake" <jholland=40akamai.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>, "zzhang@juniper.net" <zzhang@juniper.net>, "n.leymann@telekom.de" <n.leymann@telekom.de>, "pim@ietf.org" <pim@ietf.org>, "mboned@ietf.org" <mboned@ietf.org>, "fenner@fenron.com" <fenner@fenron.com>, Dave Katz <dkatz@juniper.net>
In-Reply-To: <8c620ad0-2174-4cc4-9df9-5940e1225fac@innovationslab.net>
Message-ID: <cd8cbc0b-a69d-3bcd-c107-9cc1c4435feb@juniper.net>
References: <CAHANBtKf03ukXH4sgwN0WVdkaVXnbRYdAGBDmQK56YXrS-z6yA@mail.gmail.com> <CAHANBtKdfS0cPceqv8_R+ToeGOBdUksH7gArKqegqSt_Q0Sf0Q@mail.gmail.com> <ZXtzwBljE45Og27f@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <EDE809A0-E672-4A3B-9F46-E08ECD3D4C23@akamai.com> <edc9d539-4b6c-f238-54c6-210c152e2065@juniper.net> <e9ed1779-4f43-4f71-b8c3-d813bcea81d1@innovationslab.net> <CAHANBtJ0S8RfVvfcMHO5XKeDMpzN0O4Jn3MFPJXecNpBVNs6gQ@mail.gmail.com> <8c620ad0-2174-4cc4-9df9-5940e1225fac@innovationslab.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
X-EOPAttributedMessage: 0
X-MS-PublicTrafficType: Email
X-MS-TrafficTypeDiagnostic: CO1PEPF000066EA:EE_|SA0PR05MB7388:EE_
X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: 997ec39c-6948-4278-0576-08dc4925b576
X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck: 1
X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-Relay: 0
X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0;
X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: Znf7c4BmJTu2Y4nTeiD8QZ1/Ko13nmSpPC8mFOZ0lSOBzB4dvfrBVLqqew2z0Qn78XIAtMOOGmlaVnP7FLxFrKJZ7gQ3F3fpzqniJ9sw9pZ5EM8ZPLDl4eRGSDwXbCokz6QPlzVo9TfrnrQsMzXUMnZHlWUlTlYnNpXJO7xbHMC7LpXbPNeworznwMTIclYGTM6Um2HzdODTyIJ5wGocid9Mr5yMVkAGBzn4GHGvGSiakUnzLhJyJlkvNII1N2Ccy0eB5l1ODNsX430h6XM5ee3gOgWEoe8DBnia8+JOkIVL4heiZy5JuuOCP+oCJQElGhu5OfiEJFXLUJVmLbUf9SMB5+IIPBjjZlyg0d++9jEhZyrVy3E6rcy+zpcDbqe8Fa5qM72GrSt9ouiCewnkG9tnVGRgbIyYy3FFws6lXIVsS7AEtsrL5YTCqpKI9bhGbVAul9RXA7cfekIEug6IUBu0S7FqLV7YcHhcGc7pTKmcJ2hMeYzDR2VOzNLwqquFPvJdc/hICt9HVtZl4/COGJgzvQchibvQqJ+2toHURohCNmiYBPOh2HEdKWdtQVRwSXnloEzX9WEfXgyGSPY+rpHzWmxBM5D3XqIoOpzhRydLYlCmIsLJyVJCx3TEOSEpsHySLqnSLUHEiaDx8wnjFc8CE1/I5bSYHREqdBPprEWVy8ZAt/Nlz92oEPRTvmOSHGQWiFKJSHDmMapaHCu0FjubSZLt6qAlaK94BVh8bCB0EJfuGtYCY7WR7A0xaKyn
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:66.129.239.15; CTRY:US; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:CAL; SFV:NSPM; H:p-exchfe-eqx-02.jnpr.net; PTR:InfoDomainNonexistent; CAT:NONE; SFS:(13230031)(82310400014)(376005)(36860700004)(1800799015); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102;
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Mar 2024 21:35:48.6171 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 997ec39c-6948-4278-0576-08dc4925b576
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalAttributedTenantConnectingIp: TenantId=bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4; Ip=[66.129.239.15]; Helo=[p-exchfe-eqx-02.jnpr.net]
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: CO1PEPF000066EA.namprd05.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Anonymous
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: HybridOnPrem
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: SA0PR05MB7388
X-Proofpoint-GUID: _G37RljZmBh1AB6O5AyJu9W6MCs45LUX
X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: _G37RljZmBh1AB6O5AyJu9W6MCs45LUX
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.272,Aquarius:18.0.1011,Hydra:6.0.619,FMLib:17.11.176.26 definitions=2024-03-20_12,2024-03-18_03,2023-05-22_02
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_spam_notspam policy=outbound_spam score=0 impostorscore=0 suspectscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 adultscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=586 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.19.0-2403140001 definitions=main-2403200172
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pim/ty4peHJcefrnq94DO0ICTxD6xWg>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 20 Mar 2024 16:15:09 -0700
Subject: Re: [pim] [MBONED] IGMPv3 backward compatibility issue killing SSM
X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast <pim.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pim>, <mailto:pim-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Wed, 20 Mar 2024 21:36:09 -0000

On Wed, 20 Mar 2024, Brian Haberman wrote:

<snipped>
|      Personally, it seems like most of the scenarios posited have been related
| to old kit or mis-configuration. We can't standardize away those types of
| actions. At best, I think we can add recommended default settings for the
| compatibility mode variables referenced in section 7.

I think this is good perspective here.  Having old hosts that don't 
support IGMPv3 is definitely a scenario to consider, as you never know 
what end users are going to stick on a LAN.  And as we discussed in this 
thread, the spec does a pretty good job of not breaking SSM when old hosts 
appear on a LAN.  But having ~routers~ on a LAN that don't support IGMPv3 
seems quite another thing.  Is this really a common scenario worth 
considering now?  And wouldn't it just be easier to just turn IGMP off for 
such old routers if you are worried about them spoiling the SSM fun for 
everyone else?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email