Isn't source discovery and efficiency a big concern for ASM? If individual streams are tied to a specific source then it's possible to live without some of the overhead involved in ASM. Joins go straight to the source, traffic is disseminated via direct paths instead of being replicated by the RP, etc etc..
Disclaimer: Other than being a lab rat I haven't done much with multicast in the wild. 2011/12/29 Jeff Tantsura <jeff.tants...@ericsson.com> > Mike, > > To my knowledge in most today's networks even if legacy equipment don't > support IGMPv3 most likely 1st hop router does static translation and SSM > upstream. > The reason not to migrate to SSM is usually - ASM is already there and > works just fine :) > Cost to support RP infrastructure is usually the main non-technical factor > to not to use ASM. > Would be interested to hear from the SPs on the list. > > Regards, > Jeff > > On Dec 28, 2011, at 2:19 PM, "Mike McBride" <mmcbri...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Marshall, > > > > On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Marshall Eubanks > > <marshall.euba...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Dear Mike; > >> > >> On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 4:48 PM, Mike McBride <mmcbri...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>> Anyone using ASM (versus SSM) for IPTV? If so why? > >>> > >> > >> From what I understand, the answer is likely to be "yes" and the > >> reason is likely to be "deployed equipment only > >> supports IGMP v2." > > > > Agreed. I'm seeking confirmation, from IPTV implementers, that non > > igmpv3 support is the reason for using ASM with IPTV. Versus other > > reasons such as reducing state. Or is this a non issue and everyone is > > using SSM with IPTV? > > > > thanks, > > mike > > > >> Regards > >> Marshall > >> > >>> thanks, > >>> mike > >>> > > > > >
