Why do you think you need an assigned mcast block? All inter domain mcast uses source trees only, so just use SSM and you don't need address assignments. Greg On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Philip Lavine <source_route@yahoo.com> wrote:
How do I get a registered multicast block?
You can also use the glop IP addressing: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3180 Quentin -----Original Message----- From: Greg Shepherd [mailto:gjshep@gmail.com] Sent: Thu 5/3/2012 9:35 PM To: Philip Lavine Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: mulcast assignments Why do you think you need an assigned mcast block? All inter domain mcast uses source trees only, so just use SSM and you don't need address assignments. Greg On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Philip Lavine <source_route@yahoo.com> wrote:
How do I get a registered multicast block?
Sure, but GLOP predated SSM, and was really only an interim fix for the presumed need of mcast address assignments. GLOP only gives you a /24 for each ASN where SSM gives you a /8 for every unique unicast address you have along with vastly superior security and network simplicity. Greg On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Quentin Carpent <quentin.carpent@vtx-telecom.ch> wrote:
You can also use the glop IP addressing: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3180
Quentin
-----Original Message----- From: Greg Shepherd [mailto:gjshep@gmail.com] Sent: Thu 5/3/2012 9:35 PM To: Philip Lavine Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: mulcast assignments
Why do you think you need an assigned mcast block? All inter domain mcast uses source trees only, so just use SSM and you don't need address assignments.
Greg
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Philip Lavine <source_route@yahoo.com> wrote:
How do I get a registered multicast block?
Simpler solution... Just set the P flag and use your unicast prefix as part of the group ID. For example, if your unicast prefix is 2001:db8:f00d::/48, you could use: ff4e:2001:db8:f00d::<group number> Where <group number> is any number of your choosing up to 64 bits, but recommended to be ≤32 bits. Make sense? Owen On May 3, 2012, at 1:00 PM, Greg Shepherd wrote:
Sure, but GLOP predated SSM, and was really only an interim fix for the presumed need of mcast address assignments. GLOP only gives you a /24 for each ASN where SSM gives you a /8 for every unique unicast address you have along with vastly superior security and network simplicity.
Greg
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Quentin Carpent <quentin.carpent@vtx-telecom.ch> wrote:
You can also use the glop IP addressing: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3180
Quentin
-----Original Message----- From: Greg Shepherd [mailto:gjshep@gmail.com] Sent: Thu 5/3/2012 9:35 PM To: Philip Lavine Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: mulcast assignments
Why do you think you need an assigned mcast block? All inter domain mcast uses source trees only, so just use SSM and you don't need address assignments.
Greg
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Philip Lavine <source_route@yahoo.com> wrote:
How do I get a registered multicast block?
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 1:19 PM, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:
Simpler solution... Just set the P flag and use your unicast prefix as part of the group ID.
For example, if your unicast prefix is 2001:db8:f00d::/48, you could use:
ff4e:2001:db8:f00d::<group number>
Where <group number> is any number of your choosing up to 64 bits, but recommended to be ≤32 bits.
Make sense?
Sure, for v6. :) Greg
Owen
On May 3, 2012, at 1:00 PM, Greg Shepherd wrote:
Sure, but GLOP predated SSM, and was really only an interim fix for the presumed need of mcast address assignments. GLOP only gives you a /24 for each ASN where SSM gives you a /8 for every unique unicast address you have along with vastly superior security and network simplicity.
Greg
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Quentin Carpent <quentin.carpent@vtx-telecom.ch> wrote:
You can also use the glop IP addressing: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3180
Quentin
-----Original Message----- From: Greg Shepherd [mailto:gjshep@gmail.com] Sent: Thu 5/3/2012 9:35 PM To: Philip Lavine Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: mulcast assignments
Why do you think you need an assigned mcast block? All inter domain mcast uses source trees only, so just use SSM and you don't need address assignments.
Greg
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Philip Lavine <source_route@yahoo.com> wrote:
How do I get a registered multicast block?
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 1:42 PM, <Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu> wrote:
On Thu, 03 May 2012 13:38:14 -0700, Greg Shepherd said:
Make sense?
Sure, for v6. :)
Does it make sense to be planning new deployments for anythign else? ;)
(Hint - if your reaction is "but we're not v6-capable", who's fault is that?)
The original question was not from me. :) But even for IPv6 I would avoid embedded addressing and just use SSM. With SSM there's no need for embedded addressing and again you get all the security and network simplicity. FF3x::/96 Greg
On 03/05/2012 21:00, Greg Shepherd wrote:
Sure, but GLOP predated SSM, and was really only an interim fix for the presumed need of mcast address assignments. GLOP only gives you a /24 for each ASN where SSM gives you a /8 for every unique unicast address you have along with vastly superior security and network simplicity.
SSM is indeed a lot simpler and better than GLOP in every conceivable way - except vendor support. It needs igmpv3 on all intermediate devices and SSM support on the client device. All major desktop operating systems now have SSM support (OS/X since 10.7/Lion), but there is still lots of older hardware which either doesn't support igmpv3 or else only supports it in a very primitive fashion. This can lead to Unexpected Behaviour in naive roll-outs. Nick
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> wrote:
On 03/05/2012 21:00, Greg Shepherd wrote:
Sure, but GLOP predated SSM, and was really only an interim fix for the presumed need of mcast address assignments. GLOP only gives you a /24 for each ASN where SSM gives you a /8 for every unique unicast address you have along with vastly superior security and network simplicity.
SSM is indeed a lot simpler and better than GLOP in every conceivable way - except vendor support. It needs igmpv3 on all intermediate devices and SSM support on the client device. All major desktop operating systems now have SSM support (OS/X since 10.7/Lion), but there is still lots of older hardware which either doesn't support igmpv3 or else only supports it in a very primitive fashion. This can lead to Unexpected Behaviour in naive roll-outs.
I haven't seen a piece of network gear without SSM support in a very long time. The weak link is the applications. It was the OS stacks but that's finally caught up - it only took it 10 years... The weakest link is simply multicast deployment - if it's not everywhere it has little use. That's what AMT is promising to fix. And with AMT comes the opportunity to bring SSM to non-SSM-capable apps if it is implemented correctly. Greg
Nick
And I've seen plenty of gear without SSM support: Some of the larger offenders: Juniper Clusters. Cisco ASA Some Linksys managed switches (no IGMP snooping support for it). I really wouldn't think it'd be that hard to implement SSM if the equipment had functional ASM support, but that's a story for another day I guess. Most development for mcast largely occurred between the last 90s and early 2000s it seems. Since ~2005 once the hopes of inter-domain multicast fizzled and IPTV failed to launch in any meaningfully way, multicast development has largely been neglected by the major equipment vendors and cast away as some funky thing used by certain enterprise and educational market segments. At least, IMHO... On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 6:44 PM, Greg Shepherd <gjshep@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> wrote:
On 03/05/2012 21:00, Greg Shepherd wrote:
Sure, but GLOP predated SSM, and was really only an interim fix for the presumed need of mcast address assignments. GLOP only gives you a /24 for each ASN where SSM gives you a /8 for every unique unicast address you have along with vastly superior security and network simplicity.
SSM is indeed a lot simpler and better than GLOP in every conceivable way - except vendor support. It needs igmpv3 on all intermediate devices and SSM support on the client device. All major desktop operating systems now have SSM support (OS/X since 10.7/Lion), but there is still lots of older hardware which either doesn't support igmpv3 or else only supports it in a very primitive fashion. This can lead to Unexpected Behaviour in naive roll-outs.
I haven't seen a piece of network gear without SSM support in a very long time. The weak link is the applications. It was the OS stacks but that's finally caught up - it only took it 10 years...
The weakest link is simply multicast deployment - if it's not everywhere it has little use. That's what AMT is promising to fix. And with AMT comes the opportunity to bring SSM to non-SSM-capable apps if it is implemented correctly.
Greg
Nick
Hi, All modern routers support mapping from IGMPv2 to PIM SSM, all static, some others thru DNS, etc Regards, Jeff On May 3, 2012, at 12:34 PM, "Nick Hilliard" <nick@foobar.org> wrote:
On 03/05/2012 21:00, Greg Shepherd wrote:
Sure, but GLOP predated SSM, and was really only an interim fix for the presumed need of mcast address assignments. GLOP only gives you a /24 for each ASN where SSM gives you a /8 for every unique unicast address you have along with vastly superior security and network simplicity.
SSM is indeed a lot simpler and better than GLOP in every conceivable way - except vendor support. It needs igmpv3 on all intermediate devices and SSM support on the client device. All major desktop operating systems now have SSM support (OS/X since 10.7/Lion), but there is still lots of older hardware which either doesn't support igmpv3 or else only supports it in a very primitive fashion. This can lead to Unexpected Behaviour in naive roll-outs.
Nick
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 2:53 AM, Jeff Tantsura <jeff.tantsura@ericsson.com> wrote:
Hi,
All modern routers support mapping from IGMPv2 to PIM SSM, all static, some others thru DNS, etc
I am not sure what you mean here. To support SSM, you need IGMPv3. Most routers do support IGMPv3, but there is still a fair amount of legacy gear at various edges which doesn't. Regards Marshall
Regards, Jeff
On May 3, 2012, at 12:34 PM, "Nick Hilliard" <nick@foobar.org> wrote:
On 03/05/2012 21:00, Greg Shepherd wrote:
Sure, but GLOP predated SSM, and was really only an interim fix for the presumed need of mcast address assignments. GLOP only gives you a /24 for each ASN where SSM gives you a /8 for every unique unicast address you have along with vastly superior security and network simplicity.
SSM is indeed a lot simpler and better than GLOP in every conceivable way - except vendor support. It needs igmpv3 on all intermediate devices and SSM support on the client device. All major desktop operating systems now have SSM support (OS/X since 10.7/Lion), but there is still lots of older hardware which either doesn't support igmpv3 or else only supports it in a very primitive fashion. This can lead to Unexpected Behaviour in naive roll-outs.
Nick
Marshall, That's exactly what the feature does, when it receives a IGMPv1/2 join it adds a preconfigured S and sends S,G (INCLUDE)upstream. Google for IGMP mapping Regards, Jeff On May 4, 2012, at 1:45 PM, "Marshall Eubanks" <marshall.eubanks@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 2:53 AM, Jeff Tantsura <jeff.tantsura@ericsson.com> wrote:
Hi,
All modern routers support mapping from IGMPv2 to PIM SSM, all static, some others thru DNS, etc
I am not sure what you mean here. To support SSM, you need IGMPv3. Most routers do support IGMPv3, but there is still a fair amount of legacy gear at various edges which doesn't.
Regards Marshall
Regards, Jeff
On May 3, 2012, at 12:34 PM, "Nick Hilliard" <nick@foobar.org> wrote:
On 03/05/2012 21:00, Greg Shepherd wrote:
Sure, but GLOP predated SSM, and was really only an interim fix for the presumed need of mcast address assignments. GLOP only gives you a /24 for each ASN where SSM gives you a /8 for every unique unicast address you have along with vastly superior security and network simplicity.
SSM is indeed a lot simpler and better than GLOP in every conceivable way - except vendor support. It needs igmpv3 on all intermediate devices and SSM support on the client device. All major desktop operating systems now have SSM support (OS/X since 10.7/Lion), but there is still lots of older hardware which either doesn't support igmpv3 or else only supports it in a very primitive fashion. This can lead to Unexpected Behaviour in naive roll-outs.
Nick
On May 3, 2012, at 12:24 PM, Philip Lavine wrote:
How do I get a registered multicast block?
If you truly need a globally unique multicast block, and GLOP/RFC6034/SSM won't work, you can submit an application to IANA here: http://www.iana.org/form/multicast-ipv4 -- Andrew Hoyos hoyosa@gmail.com
participants (10)
-
Andrew Hoyos -
Greg Shepherd -
Jeff Tantsura -
Marshall Eubanks -
Nick Hilliard -
Owen DeLong -
PC -
Philip Lavine -
Quentin Carpent -
Valdis.Kletnieks＠vt.edu