Marshall,
That's exactly what the feature does, when it receives a IGMPv1/2 join it adds
a preconfigured S and sends S,G (INCLUDE)upstream.
Google for IGMP mapping
Regards,
Jeff
On May 4, 2012, at 1:45 PM, "Marshall Eubanks"
wrote:
> On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 2:53 AM, Jeff Tantsura
> wrote:
>
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 2:53 AM, Jeff Tantsura
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> All modern routers support mapping from IGMPv2 to PIM SSM, all static, some
> others thru DNS, etc
I am not sure what you mean here. To support SSM, you need IGMPv3. Most
routers do support IGMPv3, but there is still a fair amount of
On May 3, 2012, at 12:24 PM, Philip Lavine wrote:
>How do I get a registered multicast block?
If you truly need a globally unique multicast block, and GLOP/RFC6034/SSM won't
work, you can submit an application to IANA here:
http://www.iana.org/form/multicast-ipv4
--
Andrew Hoyos
hoy...@gm
Hi,
All modern routers support mapping from IGMPv2 to PIM SSM, all static, some
others thru DNS, etc
Regards,
Jeff
On May 3, 2012, at 12:34 PM, "Nick Hilliard" wrote:
> On 03/05/2012 21:00, Greg Shepherd wrote:
>> Sure, but GLOP predated SSM, and was really only an interim fix for
>> the pres
And I've seen plenty of gear without SSM support:
Some of the larger offenders:
Juniper Clusters.
Cisco ASA
Some Linksys managed switches (no IGMP snooping support for it).
I really wouldn't think it'd be that hard to implement SSM if the equipment
had functional ASM support, but that's a story f
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
> On 03/05/2012 21:00, Greg Shepherd wrote:
>> Sure, but GLOP predated SSM, and was really only an interim fix for
>> the presumed need of mcast address assignments. GLOP only gives you a
>> /24 for each ASN where SSM gives you a /8 for every un
On 03/05/2012 21:00, Greg Shepherd wrote:
> Sure, but GLOP predated SSM, and was really only an interim fix for
> the presumed need of mcast address assignments. GLOP only gives you a
> /24 for each ASN where SSM gives you a /8 for every unique unicast
> address you have along with vastly superior
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 1:42 PM, wrote:
> On Thu, 03 May 2012 13:38:14 -0700, Greg Shepherd said:
>> > Make sense?
>>
>> Sure, for v6. :)
>
> Does it make sense to be planning new deployments for anythign else? ;)
>
> (Hint - if your reaction is "but we're not v6-capable", who's fault is that?)
T
On Thu, 03 May 2012 13:38:14 -0700, Greg Shepherd said:
> > Make sense?
>
> Sure, for v6. :)
Does it make sense to be planning new deployments for anythign else? ;)
(Hint - if your reaction is "but we're not v6-capable", who's fault is that?)
pgpI1LRac8WuO.pgp
Description: PGP signature
PM, Quentin Carpent
>> wrote:
>>> You can also use the glop IP addressing:
>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3180
>>>
>>> Quentin
>>>
>>> -Original Message-----
>>> From: Greg Shepherd [mailto:gjs...@gmail.com]
>>>
ginal Message-
>> From: Greg Shepherd [mailto:gjs...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Thu 5/3/2012 9:35 PM
>> To: Philip Lavine
>> Cc: NANOG list
>> Subject: Re: mulcast assignments
>>
>> Why do you think you need an assigned mcast block? All inter domain
>> mcast u
; Cc: NANOG list
> Subject: Re: mulcast assignments
>
> Why do you think you need an assigned mcast block? All inter domain
> mcast uses source trees only, so just use SSM and you don't need
> address assignments.
>
> Greg
>
> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Philip Lavine wrote:
>> How do I get a registered multicast block?
>>
>
>
You can also use the glop IP addressing:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3180
Quentin
-Original Message-
From: Greg Shepherd [mailto:gjs...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thu 5/3/2012 9:35 PM
To: Philip Lavine
Cc: NANOG list
Subject: Re: mulcast assignments
Why do you think you need an assigned mcast
Why do you think you need an assigned mcast block? All inter domain
mcast uses source trees only, so just use SSM and you don't need
address assignments.
Greg
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Philip Lavine wrote:
> How do I get a registered multicast block?
>
How do I get a registered multicast block?
15 matches
Mail list logo