[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [MBONED] 224.0.0.12

I suppose I can even though I had blocked the FLIP experience out of my consciousness. :)
When FLIP was proposed and discussed (Adelaide IETF, if I recall), it was the target of a rather vicious attack. The authors decided to forgo any further standardization efforts and the I-D died without ever advancing. I don't recall how the multicast addresses were chosen for that document. I would venture to guess that one of the primary editors picked the next available link-local address from the IANA registry.
For those of you interested... The initial implementation was never shipped in a product that I am aware of. And I am pretty sure that the implementation didn't actually use the 224.0.0.12 address.
In addition, you may notice the resemblance of Bi-Directional Forwarding Detection (BFD) to FLIP. :) 

Regards,
Brian

Dave Thaler wrote:

Perhaps Brian Haberman can comment on FLIP?


-----Original Message-----
From: Lucy Lynch [mailto:llynch at civil-tongue.net]
Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2009 7:44 AM
To: Dave Thaler
Cc: Marshall Eubanks; mboned at ietf.org
Subject: Re: [MBONED] 224.0.0.12

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



_______________________________________________
MBONED mailing list
MBONED at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mboned