Re: [MBONED] 224.0.0.12

[Lucy Lynch <llynch at civil-tongue.net>]

On Wed, 27 May 2009, Dave Thaler wrote:

> I couldn't find anything either, although it appears to have
> been mentioned in
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-mukherjee-dhc-dhcproam-00
> but then removed from version -01.

ah, but either 00 or 01 is worth a quick look *just* for the ascii art:

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-mukherjee-dhc-dhcproam-01

see fig. 2

FWIW, there is also a mention in:

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-sandiick-flip-00

7.1 All-FLIP-Peers

The All-FLIP-Peers multicast address has the following possible values:

           o  IPv4 _ 224.0.0.12
           o  IPv6 _ FF02:0:0:0:0:0:0:C


individual submission, c.2000

- Lucy

> -Dave
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: mboned-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:mboned-bounces at ietf.org] On
> > Behalf Of Marshall Eubanks
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2009 3:31 PM
> > To: Marshall Eubanks
> > Cc: mboned at ietf.org
> > Subject: Re: [MBONED] 224.0.0.12
> >
> > Unless someone speaks up by June 6th this will be removed from the
> > IANA list and would probably eventually be reassigned.
> >
> > Regards
> > Marshall
> >
> > On May 23, 2009, at 3:14 PM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
> >
> > > In the IANA list
> > >
> > > http://www.iana.org/assignments/multicast-addresses/
> > >
> > > 224.0.0.12 is listed as
> > >
> > > 224.0.0.12 DHCP Server / Relay Agent [RFC1884]
> > >
> > > This address is manifestly not assigned in RFC 1884 (which deals
> > > with IPv6), and a search on my part reveals only
> > > that DHCP-AGENTS.MCAST.NET resolves to 224.0.0.12
> > >
> > > Does anyone know what, if anything, this address is really used for,
> > > and on what authority ?
> > >
> > > My suspicion at present is that this may be a lame delegation.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Marshall
> > >
> > > P.S. Bob Hinden says
> > >
> > > > After doing some searches, it looks like the 224.0.0.12 multicast
> > > > was defined in a draft "Extensions to DHCP for Roaming Users"
> > > > <draft-mukherjee-dhc-dhcproam-00.txt>.  This appears to be where
> > > > the incorrect reference is.
> > > >
> > > > The next version of that draft -01 does not have the definition.
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > MBONED mailing list
> > > MBONED at ietf.org
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mboned
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > MBONED mailing list
> > MBONED at ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mboned
>
> _______________________________________________
> MBONED mailing list
> MBONED at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mboned