Last Modifield: 05/30/2002
This working group will act as a consultant to any PIM-over-Foo proposals, including but not limited to PIM-over-ATM, using PIM for multiprotocol label switching, and PIM-over-UDLR links.
1) PIM-SM v2 specification (standards track)
This document is a specification for Sparse Mode Protocol Independent Multicast.
2) PIM-DM v2 speficication (standards track)
This document is a specification for Dense Mode Protocol Independent Multicast.
3) PIM MIB (standards track)
This document contains the MIB definitions for PIMv2.
|AUG 98||Hold the first Working Group meeting and discuss the charter and the state of progress on the chartered items.|
|AUG 98||Update the PIM-DM version 2 Internet-draft. Go to WG last call. Submision to IESG for considerations as proposed standard.|
|AUG 98||Resubmit the latest PIM-SM version 2 specification to IESG for consideration as a proposed standard RFC|
|DEC 98||Submit Internet-Draft describing use of IP security with PIM.|
|DEC 98||Submit updated PIM-SM and PIM-DM internet-drafts, clarifying any inconsistencies or ambiguities in the previous drafts.|
|APR 99||Submit PIM-SM version 2 and PIM-DM version 2 specifications to IESG for consideration as Draft Standards.|
|APR 99||Submit PIM-SM and PIM-DM Applicability Statements|
|APR 99||Submit PIMv2 MIB to IESG for consideration as proposed standard.|
|NOV 99||Submit PIMv2 MIB to IESG for consideration as draft standard.|
Salon II RTG pim Protocol Independent Multicast WG * PIM-DM - No one had reviewed the draft !!! Review by the group is badly needed !!!! Discussion about whether this should be experimental, informational or standards track. Seemed to be no consensus. Radia Pearlman PIM Host extensions the end nodes do PIM intended to work for SSM SSM now requires IGMPv3 support in the Host and the First Hop router. PIM-HE - creates a unicast PIM Host Join message - destination of this packet is S Uses the IP router alert option on the IP header so that compliant routers can trap and process. If the router that receives this message is not first hop then the router Creates a tunnel fo the receiver Process/demon is downloadable Host-leave prune message needed as well If first hop router receives, then just join the group. If not, then Have to worry about DOS attacks, so need to limit numbers of tunnels Need to authenticate Q. How is this different from Ross Finlayson's automatic UDP encoding ? A. Conceptually not very different - just one is UDP based and this one uses PIM. Q. What if the tunnel connects two PIM domains ? Dino F. - the difference is that the host just accepts multicast data when it comes while a router does RPF checks. Mark Handley - I think that tunnels between PIM clouds could create all sorts of problems and you might want to avoid this. A. Solving the first mile problem is what we were focusing on here. Mark Handley. I am worried about implosion problems. What if this gets really popular. A. This allows some people to join, whereas before they couldn't get traffic at all. Q. Dino F. - why make joins periodic ? A. (to make them soft state) Q. Liming W - Packets with Router alert may be blocked for, e.g., Cisco routers. A. I believe that this is not the case for all Cisco routers. A. Dino F. If the a packet of a given protocol comes with a router alert, three things could happen - - - if the protocol is unknown, forward - - - if the protocol is PIM, gets sent to the PIM module, which will drop it. - - - to do the right thing would require a new implementation, and old implementations would not do the right thing. Q. Mark Handley Once the script kiddies discover router alerts, then everyone will stop forwarding them. Bill Fenner - A useful thing would be to send packets with router alerts across real networks and see what happens, Dino F. IGMPv2 and RSVP are the most common users of router alerts. Beau Williamson - In my opinion, most of these tunneling ideas are something we can do technically, the real problems are getting it done from a business standpoint. Tom P. Should this be a part of the working group charter ? Or MboneD <Consensus seemed to be no, it should be in MBoneD> Mark Handley The PIM-SM spec has timed out. The spec is in good shape though. IP Sec AH has been added. This is exactly what was done for IGMPv3 spec, and the IESG passed that. Dave Thaler - I was just at the SEND WG and they have the exact same problem. Mark Handley - The other spec is the BSR spec. Tom P. Does the PIM spec depend on the BSR spec ? Mark Handley - It is not totally clear if it does. Certainly That leaves the BiDir Spec Isadore K. The BiDir spec is coming. It can maybe submitted at the same time Tom. P. So we need to do one more rev of that ? Isadore K. - And also of the PIM spec.