From: John Gibson (johngibson1541@yahoo.com)
Date: Mon Jun 25 2007 - 23:39:26 ART
Hi Morten, Paul just pointed me to rfc 4601's
section 3.
From their item 3.4 , it is obvious that only
the leaf router needs this command. The leaf
router knows it is directly connected to receiver
(maybe by looking at igmp group member).
So, no effect if branch routers do this command.
At their item 3.4 , it looks like if another
branch for another far end leaf is asking for (S.G)
(spt-threshold 1) the downward path will have to
have (S,G) down from RP to the dividing point to
the branch to the far end.
By default, every leaf wants (S,G) (spt-threshold 1)
at "phase 3" (just read the item 3.4 of rfc 4601).
(S,G) is guaranteed all cleaned up only when all
leaf routers say spt-threshold infinity.
John
--- Morten Christensen <mbc@dansupport.dk> wrote:
> I'm hammering away on the same issue right now,
>
> Is you're conclusion that to prevent S,G the command
> should be applied to
> ALL routers from RP down to source?
>
> What happens if some routers along the way is
> configured with spt-thre
> infinity and some are not?
>
> I truly hate multicast
>
> Morten
>
>
>
>
> On 6/25/07 5:27 PM, "johngibson1541@yahoo.com"
> <johngibson1541@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I know this command is used to reduce those (S,G)
> entries.
> >
> > But when I tested this, not only the "leaf router"
> > (immediately adjacent to the receiver) is
> effected,
> > but also my branch router down from my RP.
> >
> > It makes sense to me if univercd said this command
> be
> > applied to all multicast routers and all branch
> > routers down the RP and leaf router are effected.
> >
> > I will assume this is a minor error in univercd.
> >
> >
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Jul 01 2007 - 17:24:51 ART