< draft-ietf-pim-dm-new-v2-03.txt		draft-ietf-pim-dm-new-v2-04.txt >
	Internet Engineering Task Force PIM WG		Internet Engineering Task Force PIM WG
	INTERNET DRAFT Andrew Adams (NextHop Technolgies)		INTERNET DRAFT Andrew Adams (NextHop Technolgies)
	draft-ietf-pim-dm-new-v2-03.txt Jonathan Nicholas (ITT A/CD)		draft-ietf-pim-dm-new-v2-04.txt Jonathan Nicholas (ITT A/CD)
	William Siadak (NextHop Technologies)		William Siadak (NextHop Technologies)
	February 2003		September 2003
	Expires August 2003		Expires March 2004
	Protocol Independent Multicast - Dense Mode (PIM-DM):		Protocol Independent Multicast - Dense Mode (PIM-DM):
	Protocol Specification (Revised)		Protocol Specification (Revised)
	Status of this Document		Status of this Document
	This document is an Internet Draft and is in full conformance with all		This document is an Internet Draft and is in full conformance with all
	provisions of Section 10 of RFC 2026.		provisions of Section 10 of RFC 2026.
	Internet Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task		Internet Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task
	skipping to change at page 33, line 44 ¶		skipping to change at page 33, line 44 ¶
	Receive Preferred Assert or State Refresh		Receive Preferred Assert or State Refresh
	An Assert or State Refresh is received that has a metric better than		An Assert or State Refresh is received that has a metric better than
	or equal to that of the current Assert winner. The Assert state		or equal to that of the current Assert winner. The Assert state
	machine remains in Loser (L) state. If the metric was received in		machine remains in Loser (L) state. If the metric was received in
	an Assert, the router MUST set the Assert Timer (AT(S,G,I)) to		an Assert, the router MUST set the Assert Timer (AT(S,G,I)) to
	Assert_Time. If the metric was received in a State Refresh, the		Assert_Time. If the metric was received in a State Refresh, the
	router MUST set the Assert Timer (AT(S,G,I)) to three times the		router MUST set the Assert Timer (AT(S,G,I)) to three times the
	received State Refresh Interval. If the metric is better than the		received State Refresh Interval. If the metric is better than the
	current Assert Winner, the router MUST store the address and metric		current Assert Winner, the router MUST store the address and metric
	of the new Assert Winner and if CouldAssert == TRUE, the router		of the new Assert Winner and if CouldAssert(S,G,I) == TRUE, the
	MUST multicast a Prune(S,G) to the new Assert winner.		router MUST multicast a Prune(S,G) to the new Assert winner.
	AT(S,G,I) Expires		AT(S,G,I) Expires
	The (S,G) Assert Timer (AT(S,G,I)) expires. The Assert state		The (S,G) Assert Timer (AT(S,G,I)) expires. The Assert state
	machine MUST transition to NoInfo (NI) state. The router MUST		machine MUST transition to NoInfo (NI) state. The router MUST
	delete the Assert Winner's address and metric. If CouldAssert ==		delete the Assert Winner's address and metric. If CouldAssert ==
	TRUE, the router MUST evaluate any possible transitions to its		TRUE, the router MUST evaluate any possible transitions to its
	Upstream(S,G) state machine.		Upstream(S,G) state machine.
	CouldAssert -> FALSE		CouldAssert -> FALSE
	CouldAssert has become FALSE because interface I has become the RPF		CouldAssert has become FALSE because interface I has become the RPF
	skipping to change at page 43, line 12 ¶		skipping to change at page 43, line 12 ¶
	| Metric |		| Metric |
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	PIM Ver, Type, Reserved, Checksum		PIM Ver, Type, Reserved, Checksum
	Described above.		Described above.
	Multicast Group Address		Multicast Group Address
	The multicast group address in the Encoded Multicast address format		The multicast group address in the Encoded Multicast address format
	given in section 4.7.3.		given in section 4.7.3.
	Source Address		Source Address
	The source address in the Encoded Source address format given in		The source address in the Encoded Unicast address format given in
	section 4.7.4.		section 4.7.2.
	R		R
	The Rendezvous Point Tree bit. Set to 0 for PIM-DM. Ignored upon		The Rendezvous Point Tree bit. Set to 0 for PIM-DM. Ignored upon
	receipt.		receipt.
	Metric Preference		Metric Preference
	The preference value assigned to the unicast routing protocol that		The preference value assigned to the unicast routing protocol that
	provided the route to the source.		provided the route to the source.
	Metric		Metric
	skipping to change at page 44, line 35 ¶		skipping to change at page 44, line 35 ¶
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	PIM Ver, Type, Reserved, Checksum		PIM Ver, Type, Reserved, Checksum
	Described above.		Described above.
	Multicast Group Address		Multicast Group Address
	The multicast group address in the Encoded Multicast address format		The multicast group address in the Encoded Multicast address format
	given in section 4.7.3.		given in section 4.7.3.
	Source Address		Source Address
	The address of the data source in the Encoded Source address format		The address of the data source in the Encoded Unicast address format
	given in section 4.7.4.		given in section 4.7.2.
	Originator Address		Originator Address
	The address of the first hop router in the Encoded Source address		The address of the first hop router in the Encoded Source address
	format given in section 4.7.4.		format given in section 4.7.4.
	R		R
	The Rendezvous Point Tree bit. Set to 0 for PIM-DM. Ignored upon		The Rendezvous Point Tree bit. Set to 0 for PIM-DM. Ignored upon
	receipt.		receipt.
	Metric Preference		Metric Preference
	skipping to change at page 53, line 49 ¶		skipping to change at page 53, line 49 ¶
	[1] S.E. Deering, "Multicast Routing in a Datagram Internetwork",		[1] S.E. Deering, "Multicast Routing in a Datagram Internetwork",
	Ph.D. Thesis, Electrical Engineering Dept., Stanford University,		Ph.D. Thesis, Electrical Engineering Dept., Stanford University,
	December 1991.		December 1991.
	[2] D. Waitzman, B.Partridge, S.Deering, "Distance Vector Multicast		[2] D. Waitzman, B.Partridge, S.Deering, "Distance Vector Multicast
	Routing Protocol", November 1988, RFC 1075		Routing Protocol", November 1988, RFC 1075
	[3] W. Fenner, M. Handley, H.Holbrook, I. Kouvelas, "Protocol		[3] W. Fenner, M. Handley, H.Holbrook, I. Kouvelas, "Protocol
	Independent Multicast - Sparse Mode (PIM-SM)",		Independent Multicast - Sparse Mode (PIM-SM)",
	draft-ietf-pim-sm-v2-new-06.txt, work in progress.		draft-ietf-pim-sm-v2-new-07.txt, work in progress.
	[4] S.E. Deering, "Host Extensions for IP Multicasting", August 1989,		[4] S.E. Deering, "Host Extensions for IP Multicasting", March 1989,
	RFC 1112.		RFC 1112.
	[5] W.Fenner, "Internet Group Management Protocol, Version 2",		[5] W.Fenner, "Internet Group Management Protocol, Version 2",
	November 1997, RFC 2236.		November 1997, RFC 2236.
	[6] IANA, "Address Family Numbers", linked from		[6] IANA, "Address Family Numbers", linked from
	http://www.iana.org/numbers.html.		http://www.iana.org/numbers.html.
	[7] T. Narten, H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA		[7] T. Narten, H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA
	Considerations Section in RFCs", October 1998, RFC 2434.		Considerations Section in RFCs", October 1998, RFC 2434.
	skipping to change at page 54, line 34 ¶		skipping to change at page 54, line 34 ¶
	[12] K.McCloghrie, D.Farinacci, D.Thaler, B.Fenner, "Protocol		[12] K.McCloghrie, D.Farinacci, D.Thaler, B.Fenner, "Protocol
	Independent Multicast MIB for IPv4", October 2000, RFC 2934		Independent Multicast MIB for IPv4", October 2000, RFC 2934
	[13] S. Deering, R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6)		[13] S. Deering, R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6)
	Specification", December 1998, RFC 2460.		Specification", December 1998, RFC 2460.
	[14] M. Handley, I. Kouvelas, T. Speakman, L. Vicisano, "Bi-directional		[14] M. Handley, I. Kouvelas, T. Speakman, L. Vicisano, "Bi-directional
	Protocol Independent Multicast", draft-ietf-pim-bidir-04.txt,		Protocol Independent Multicast", draft-ietf-pim-bidir-04.txt,
	work in progress.		work in progress.
	[15] M. Baugher, T. Hardjono, H. Harney, B. Weis, "The Group Domain of		[15] M. Baugher, B. Weis, T. Hardjono, H. Harney, "The Group Domain of
	Interpretation", draft-ietf-msec-gdoi-07.txt, work in progress.		Interpretation", July 2003, RFC 3547.
End of changes. 8 change blocks.
	11 lines changed or deleted		11 lines changed or added
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/