Re: [pim] Re: BSM: is it bidir or ASM

[Nidhi Bhaskar <nbhaskar at cisco.com>]

> > Another option is to include both. I.e. you could include all the
> > information the BSR has in the BSM. And let the routers which receive
> > the mapping "pick" one rather than the BSR making a choice.
>
> I'd be happy to have that happen, but given the current format of the BSM
> I don't see how you can do it in a way that will be backward compatible.
> The RP is a subset of the group range
> If you enter a standard group range and then a bidir group range, it
> isn't clear how a receiving client would parse the packet.  I'm
> afraid some might overwrite the first range with the second.

Right, if the two ranges are treated as "equal" then the second one
will probably over-write the RP from the first one.

I suppose one could take the position that the encoded group address
for the sparse range and the bidir range is different :). So they
should be treated as two different ranges.

I'll discuss with other authors and get back to you. The options seem
to be to either explicitly make a decision to include only one range
at the BSR or see if we can find a backwards compatible way to include
both...


Nidhi.

_______________________________________________
pim mailing list
pim at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim