draft-ietf-mboned-routingarch-05.txt   draft-ietf-mboned-routingarch-06.txt 
Internet Engineering Task Force P. Savola Internet Engineering Task Force P. Savola
Internet-Draft CSC/FUNET Internet-Draft CSC/FUNET
Obsoletes: July 11, 2006 Obsoletes: August 15, 2006
3913,2189,2201,1584,1585 (if 3913,2189,2201,1584,1585
approved) (if approved)
Intended status: Best Current Intended status: Best Current
Practice Practice
Expires: January 12, 2007 Expires: February 16, 2007
Overview of the Internet Multicast Routing Architecture Overview of the Internet Multicast Routing Architecture
draft-ietf-mboned-routingarch-05.txt draft-ietf-mboned-routingarch-06.txt
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79. aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
skipping to change at page 1, line 38 skipping to change at page 1, line 38
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on January 12, 2007. This Internet-Draft will expire on February 16, 2007.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006). Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).
Abstract Abstract
The lack of up-to-date documentation on IP multicast routing The lack of up-to-date documentation on IP multicast routing
protocols and procedures has caused a great deal of confusion. To protocols and procedures has caused a great deal of confusion. To
clarify the situation, this memo describes the routing protocols and clarify the situation, this memo describes the routing protocols and
skipping to change at page 2, line 30 skipping to change at page 2, line 30
2.2.1. Multi-protocol BGP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 2.2.1. Multi-protocol BGP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.2.2. OSPF/IS-IS Multi-topology Extensions . . . . . . . . . 9 2.2.2. OSPF/IS-IS Multi-topology Extensions . . . . . . . . . 9
2.2.3. Issue: Overlapping Unicast/multicast Topology . . . . 9 2.2.3. Issue: Overlapping Unicast/multicast Topology . . . . 9
2.2.4. Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 2.2.4. Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.3. Learning (Active) Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 2.3. Learning (Active) Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.3.1. SSM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 2.3.1. SSM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.3.2. MSDP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 2.3.2. MSDP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.3.3. Embedded-RP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 2.3.3. Embedded-RP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.3.4. Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 2.3.4. Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.4. Configuring and Distributing PIM RP Information . . . . . 12 2.4. Configuring and Distributing PIM RP Information . . . . . 12
2.4.1. Manual Configuration with an Anycast Address . . . . . 12 2.4.1. Manual RP Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.4.2. Embedded-RP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 2.4.2. Embedded-RP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.4.3. BSR and Auto-RP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 2.4.3. BSR and Auto-RP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.4.4. Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 2.4.4. Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.5. Mechanisms for Enhanced Redundancy . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 2.5. Mechanisms for Enhanced Redundancy . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.5.1. Anycast RP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 2.5.1. Anycast RP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.5.2. Stateless RP Failover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 2.5.2. Stateless RP Failover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.5.3. Bi-directional PIM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 2.5.3. Bi-directional PIM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.5.4. Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 2.5.4. Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.6. Interactions with Hosts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 2.6. Interactions with Hosts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.6.1. Hosts Sending Multicast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 2.6.1. Hosts Sending Multicast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.6.2. Hosts Receiving Multicast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 2.6.2. Hosts Receiving Multicast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.6.3. Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 2.6.3. Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.7. Restricting Multicast Flooding in the Link Layer . . . . . 16 2.7. Restricting Multicast Flooding in the Link Layer . . . . . 16
2.7.1. Router-to-Router Flooding Reduction . . . . . . . . . 16 2.7.1. Router-to-Router Flooding Reduction . . . . . . . . . 16
2.7.2. Host/Router Flooding Reduction . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 2.7.2. Host/Router Flooding Reduction . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.7.3. Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 2.7.3. Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 3. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Appendix A. Multicast Payload Transport Extensions . . . . . . . 22 Appendix A. Multicast Payload Transport Extensions . . . . . . . 22
A.1. Reliable Multicast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 A.1. Reliable Multicast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
A.2. Multicast Group Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 A.2. Multicast Group Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 24 Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 24
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Good, up-to-date documentation of IP multicast is close to non- Good, up-to-date documentation of IP multicast is close to non-
existent. This issue is severely felt with multicast routing existent. This issue is severely felt with multicast routing
skipping to change at page 5, line 19 skipping to change at page 5, line 19
BSR Bootstrap Router BSR Bootstrap Router
CBT Core Based Trees CBT Core Based Trees
CGMP Cisco Group Management Protocol CGMP Cisco Group Management Protocol
DR Designated Router DR Designated Router
DVMRP Distance Vector Multicast Routing Protocol DVMRP Distance Vector Multicast Routing Protocol
GARP (IEEE 802.1D-2004) Generic Attribute Reg. Protocol GARP (IEEE 802.1D-2004) Generic Attribute Reg. Protocol
GMRP GARP Multicast Registration Protocol GMRP GARP Multicast Registration Protocol
IGMP Internet Group Management Protocol IGMP Internet Group Management Protocol
MBGP Multi-protocol BGP (*not* "Multicast BGP") MBGP Multi-protocol BGP (*not* "Multicast BGP")
MLD Multicast Listener Discovery MLD Multicast Listener Discovery
MMRP (IEEE 802.1ak) Multicast Multiple Registration Protocol
MOSPF Multicast OSPF MOSPF Multicast OSPF
MSDP Multicast Source Discovery Protocol MSDP Multicast Source Discovery Protocol
PGM Pragmatic General Multicast PGM Pragmatic General Multicast
PIM Protocol Independent Multicast PIM Protocol Independent Multicast
PIM-DM PIM - Dense Mode PIM-DM PIM - Dense Mode
PIM-SM PIM - Sparse Mode PIM-SM PIM - Sparse Mode
PIM-SSM PIM - Source-Specific Multicast PIM-SSM PIM - Source-Specific Multicast
RGMP (Cisco's) Router Group Management Protocol RGMP (Cisco's) Router Group Management Protocol
RP Rendezvous Point RP Rendezvous Point
SSM Source-specific Multicast SSM Source-specific Multicast
skipping to change at page 9, line 13 skipping to change at page 9, line 13
reachability information. reachability information.
The topology information is needed to perform efficient distribution The topology information is needed to perform efficient distribution
of multicast transmissions and to prevent transmission loops by of multicast transmissions and to prevent transmission loops by
applying it to the Reverse Path Forwarding (RPF) check. applying it to the Reverse Path Forwarding (RPF) check.
This subsection introduces these protocols. This subsection introduces these protocols.
2.2.1. Multi-protocol BGP 2.2.1. Multi-protocol BGP
Multiprotocol Extensions for BGP-4 [RFC2858] (often referred to as Multiprotocol Extensions for BGP-4 [I-D.ietf-idr-rfc2858bis] (often
"MBGP"; however, it is worth noting that "MBGP" does *not* stand for referred to as "MBGP"; however, it is worth noting that "MBGP" does
"Multicast BGP") specifies a mechanism by which BGP can be used to *not* stand for "Multicast BGP") specifies a mechanism by which BGP
distribute different reachability information for unicast and can be used to distribute different reachability information for
multicast traffic (using SAFI=2 for multicast). Multiprotocol BGP unicast (SAFI=1) and multicast traffic (SAFI=2). Multiprotocol BGP
has been widely deployed for years, and is also needed to route IPv6. has been widely deployed for years, and is also needed to route IPv6.
Note that SAFI=3 was originally specified for "both unicast and Note that SAFI=3 was originally specified for "both unicast and
multicast" but has been deprecated [I-D.ietf-idr-rfc2858bis]. multicast" but has since then been deprecated.
These extensions are in widespread use wherever BGP is used to These extensions are in widespread use wherever BGP is used to
distribute unicast topology information. Multicast-enabled networks distribute unicast topology information. Multicast-enabled networks
that use BGP should use Multiprotocol BGP to distribute multicast that use BGP should use Multiprotocol BGP to distribute multicast
reachability information explicitly even if the topologies are reachability information explicitly even if the topologies are
congruent to make an explicit statement about multicast reachability. congruent to make an explicit statement about multicast reachability.
A number of significant multicast transit providers even require A number of significant multicast transit providers even require
this, by doing the RPF lookups solely based on explicitly advertised this, by doing the RPF lookups solely based on explicitly advertised
multicast address family. multicast address family.
skipping to change at page 10, line 31 skipping to change at page 10, line 31
Another implemented approach is to just look up the information in Another implemented approach is to just look up the information in
the unicast routing table, and provide the user capabilities to the unicast routing table, and provide the user capabilities to
change that as appropriate, using for example copying functions change that as appropriate, using for example copying functions
discussed above. discussed above.
2.2.4. Summary 2.2.4. Summary
The following table summarizes the topology distribution approaches The following table summarizes the topology distribution approaches
described in this Section. In particular, it is recommended that if described in this Section. In particular, it is recommended that if
interdomain routing uses BGP, multicast-enabled sites should use MP- interdomain routing uses BGP, multicast-enabled sites should use MP-
BGP SAFI=1+2 even if the topology were congruent. BGP SAFI=2 for multicast and SAFI=1 for unicast even if the topology
was congruent.
+-------------+---------------+ +-------------+---------------+
| Interdomain | Intradomain | | Interdomain | Intradomain |
+--------------------- +--------------+--------------+ +--------------------- +--------------+--------------+
| Congruent topology | Yes | Yes | | Congruent topology | Yes | Yes |
| BGP without SAFI | Not recomm. | Yes | | BGP without SAFI | Not recomm. | Yes |
| MP-BGP SAFI=1+2 | Recommended | Yes | | MP-BGP SAFI=1 only | Not recomm. | Not recomm. |
| MP-BGP SAFI=2 | Recommended | Yes |
| MP-BGP SAFI=3 | Doesn't work | Doesn't work | | MP-BGP SAFI=3 | Doesn't work | Doesn't work |
| IS-IS multi-topology | No | Yes | | IS-IS multi-topology | No | Yes |
| OSPF multi-topology | No | Few implem. | | OSPF multi-topology | No | Few implem. |
+----------------------+--------------+--------------+ +----------------------+--------------+--------------+
2.3. Learning (Active) Sources 2.3. Learning (Active) Sources
Typically, multicast routing protocols must either assume that the Typically, multicast routing protocols must either assume that the
receivers know the IP addresses of the (active) sources for a group receivers know the IP addresses of the (active) sources for a group
in advance, possibly using an out-of-band mechanism (SSM), or the in advance, possibly using an out-of-band mechanism (SSM), or the
skipping to change at page 12, line 28 skipping to change at page 12, line 29
| PIM-SM w/ Embedded-RP| No | Yes | Best inter-domain ASM option | | PIM-SM w/ Embedded-RP| No | Yes | Best inter-domain ASM option |
| SSM | Yes | Yes | No major uptake yet | | SSM | Yes | Yes | No major uptake yet |
+----------------------+------+------+------------------------------+ +----------------------+------+------+------------------------------+
2.4. Configuring and Distributing PIM RP Information 2.4. Configuring and Distributing PIM RP Information
PIM-SM and Bi-dir PIM configuration mechanisms exist which are used PIM-SM and Bi-dir PIM configuration mechanisms exist which are used
to configure the RP addresses and which groups are to use those RPs to configure the RP addresses and which groups are to use those RPs
in the routers. This section outlines the approaches. in the routers. This section outlines the approaches.
2.4.1. Manual Configuration with an Anycast Address 2.4.1. Manual RP Configuration
It is often easiest just to manually configure the RP information on It is often easiest just to manually configure the RP information on
the routers when PIM-SM is used. the routers when PIM-SM is used.
Originally, static RP mapping was considered suboptimal since it Originally, static RP mapping was considered suboptimal since it
required explicit configuration changes every time the RP address required explicit configuration changes every time the RP address
changed. However, with the advent of anycast RP addressing, the RP changed. However, with the advent of anycast RP addressing, the RP
address is unlikely to ever change. Therefore, the administrative address is unlikely to ever change. Therefore, the administrative
burden is generally limited to initial configuration. Since there is burden is generally limited to initial configuration. Since there is
usually a fair amount of multicast configuration required on all usually a fair amount of multicast configuration required on all
skipping to change at page 16, line 39 skipping to change at page 16, line 43
These options are discussed in this section. These options are discussed in this section.
2.7.1. Router-to-Router Flooding Reduction 2.7.1. Router-to-Router Flooding Reduction
A proprietary solution, Cisco's RGMP [RFC3488] has been developed to A proprietary solution, Cisco's RGMP [RFC3488] has been developed to
reduce the amount of flooding between routers in a switched networks. reduce the amount of flooding between routers in a switched networks.
This is typically only considered a problem in some Ethernet-based This is typically only considered a problem in some Ethernet-based
Internet Exchange points or VPNs. Internet Exchange points or VPNs.
There have been proposals to observe and possibly react ("snoop") PIM There have been proposals to observe and possibly react ("snoop") PIM
messages [I-D.tsenevir-pim-sm-snoop][I-D.serbest-l2vpn-vpls-mcast] to messages [I-D.ietf-l2vpn-vpls-pim-snooping].
achieve the same effect.
2.7.2. Host/Router Flooding Reduction 2.7.2. Host/Router Flooding Reduction
There are a number of techniques to help reduce flooding both from a There are a number of techniques to help reduce flooding both from a
router to hosts, and from a host to the routers (and other hosts). router to hosts, and from a host to the routers (and other hosts).
Cisco's proprietary CGMP [CGMP] provides a solution where the routers Cisco's proprietary CGMP [CGMP] provides a solution where the routers
notify the switches, but also allows the switches to snoop IGMP notify the switches, but also allows the switches to snoop IGMP
packets to enable faster notification of hosts no longer wishing to packets to enable faster notification of hosts no longer wishing to
receive a group. IPv6 is not supported. receive a group. IPv6 is not supported.
IEEE 802.1D-2004 specification describes Generic Attribute IEEE 802.1D-2004 specification describes Generic Attribute
Registration Protocol (GARP), and GARP Multicast Registration Registration Protocol (GARP), and GARP Multicast Registration
Protocol (GMRP) [GMRP] is a link-layer multicast group application of Protocol (GMRP) [GMRP] is a link-layer multicast group application of
GARP that notifies switches about IP multicast group memberships. GARP that notifies switches about IP multicast group memberships.
GMRP requires support at the host stack and implementation status GMRP requires support at the host stack and it has not been widely
especially on hosts is unknown. Some further information about GARP/ implemented. Further, IEEE considers GMRP obsolete having been
replaced by Multicast Multiple Registration Protocol (MMRP) that's
being specified in IEEE 802.1ak [802.1ak]. MMRP is expected to be
mainly used between bridges. Some further information about GARP/
GMRP is also available in Appendix B of [RFC3488]. GMRP is also available in Appendix B of [RFC3488].
IGMP snooping [RFC4541] appears to be the most widely implemented IGMP snooping [RFC4541] appears to be the most widely implemented
technique. IGMP snooping requires that the switches implement a technique. IGMP snooping requires that the switches implement a
significant amount of IP-level packet inspection; this appears to be significant amount of IP-level packet inspection; this appears to be
something that is difficult to get right, and often the upgrades are something that is difficult to get right, and often the upgrades are
also a challenge. also a challenge.
Snooping switches also need to identify the ports where routers Snooping switches also need to identify the ports where routers
reside and therefore where to flood the packets. This can be reside and therefore where to flood the packets. This can be
skipping to change at page 17, line 43 skipping to change at page 17, line 50
reduction inside a single link for router-to-router and last-hop reduction inside a single link for router-to-router and last-hop
LANs. LANs.
+--------+-----+---------------------------+ +--------+-----+---------------------------+
| R-to-R | LAN | Notes | | R-to-R | LAN | Notes |
+-----------------------+--------+-----+---------------------------+ +-----------------------+--------+-----+---------------------------+
| Cisco's RGMP | Yes | No | Replaced by PIM snooping | | Cisco's RGMP | Yes | No | Replaced by PIM snooping |
| PIM snooping | Yes | No | Security issues in LANs | | PIM snooping | Yes | No | Security issues in LANs |
| IGMP/MLD snooping | No | Yes | Common, IGMPv3 or MLD bad | | IGMP/MLD snooping | No | Yes | Common, IGMPv3 or MLD bad |
| Multicast Router Disc | No | Yes | Few if any implem. yet | | Multicast Router Disc | No | Yes | Few if any implem. yet |
| IEEE 802.1D-2004 GMRP | No | Yes | Impl. status unknown | | IEEE GMRP and MMRP | No | No | No host/router deployment |
| Cisco's CGMP | No | Yes | Replaced by other snooping| | Cisco's CGMP | No | Yes | Replaced by other snooping|
+-----------------------+--------+-----+---------------------------+ +-----------------------+--------+-----+---------------------------+
3. Acknowledgements 3. Acknowledgements
Tutoring a couple multicast-related papers, the latest by Kaarle Tutoring a couple multicast-related papers, the latest by Kaarle
Ritvanen [RITVANEN] convinced the author that up-to-date multicast Ritvanen [RITVANEN] convinced the author that up-to-date multicast
routing and address assignment/allocation documentation is necessary. routing and address assignment/allocation documentation is necessary.
Leonard Giuliano, James Lingard, Jean-Jacques Pansiot, Dave Meyer, Leonard Giuliano, James Lingard, Jean-Jacques Pansiot, Dave Meyer,
skipping to change at page 18, line 31 skipping to change at page 18, line 37
However, there has been analysis of the security of multicast routing However, there has been analysis of the security of multicast routing
infrastructures [I-D.ietf-mboned-mroutesec], IGMP/MLD infrastructures [I-D.ietf-mboned-mroutesec], IGMP/MLD
[I-D.daley-magma-smld-prob], and PIM last-hop issues [I-D.daley-magma-smld-prob], and PIM last-hop issues
[I-D.savola-pim-lasthop-threats]. [I-D.savola-pim-lasthop-threats].
6. References 6. References
6.1. Normative References 6.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-idmr-dvmrp-v3] [I-D.ietf-idr-rfc2858bis]
Pusateri, T., "Distance Vector Multicast Routing Bates, T., "Multiprotocol Extensions for BGP-4",
Protocol", draft-ietf-idmr-dvmrp-v3-11 (work in progress), draft-ietf-idr-rfc2858bis-10 (work in progress),
December 2003. March 2006.
[I-D.ietf-isis-wg-multi-topology] [I-D.ietf-isis-wg-multi-topology]
Przygienda, T., "M-ISIS: Multi Topology (MT) Routing in Przygienda, T., "M-ISIS: Multi Topology (MT) Routing in
IS-IS", draft-ietf-isis-wg-multi-topology-11 (work in IS-IS", draft-ietf-isis-wg-multi-topology-11 (work in
progress), October 2005. progress), October 2005.
[I-D.ietf-mboned-addrarch] [I-D.ietf-mboned-addrarch]
Savola, P., "Overview of the Internet Multicast Addressing Savola, P., "Overview of the Internet Multicast Addressing
Architecture", draft-ietf-mboned-addrarch-04 (work in Architecture", draft-ietf-mboned-addrarch-04 (work in
progress), March 2006. progress), March 2006.
skipping to change at page 19, line 24 skipping to change at page 19, line 31
March 2006. March 2006.
[I-D.ietf-ssm-arch] [I-D.ietf-ssm-arch]
Holbrook, H. and B. Cain, "Source-Specific Multicast for Holbrook, H. and B. Cain, "Source-Specific Multicast for
IP", draft-ietf-ssm-arch-07 (work in progress), IP", draft-ietf-ssm-arch-07 (work in progress),
October 2005. October 2005.
[RFC2026] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision [RFC2026] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision
3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, October 1996. 3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, October 1996.
[RFC2858] Bates, T., Rekhter, Y., Chandra, R., and D. Katz,
"Multiprotocol Extensions for BGP-4", RFC 2858, June 2000.
[RFC3376] Cain, B., Deering, S., Kouvelas, I., Fenner, B., and A. [RFC3376] Cain, B., Deering, S., Kouvelas, I., Fenner, B., and A.
Thyagarajan, "Internet Group Management Protocol, Version Thyagarajan, "Internet Group Management Protocol, Version
3", RFC 3376, October 2002. 3", RFC 3376, October 2002.
[RFC3618] Fenner, B. and D. Meyer, "Multicast Source Discovery [RFC3618] Fenner, B. and D. Meyer, "Multicast Source Discovery
Protocol (MSDP)", RFC 3618, October 2003. Protocol (MSDP)", RFC 3618, October 2003.
[RFC3810] Vida, R. and L. Costa, "Multicast Listener Discovery [RFC3810] Vida, R. and L. Costa, "Multicast Listener Discovery
Version 2 (MLDv2) for IPv6", RFC 3810, June 2004. Version 2 (MLDv2) for IPv6", RFC 3810, June 2004.
[RFC3956] Savola, P. and B. Haberman, "Embedding the Rendezvous [RFC3956] Savola, P. and B. Haberman, "Embedding the Rendezvous
Point (RP) Address in an IPv6 Multicast Address", Point (RP) Address in an IPv6 Multicast Address",
RFC 3956, November 2004. RFC 3956, November 2004.
[RFC3973] Adams, A., Nicholas, J., and W. Siadak, "Protocol [RFC3973] Adams, A., Nicholas, J., and W. Siadak, "Protocol
Independent Multicast - Dense Mode (PIM-DM): Protocol Independent Multicast - Dense Mode (PIM-DM): Protocol
Specification (Revised)", RFC 3973, January 2005. Specification (Revised)", RFC 3973, January 2005.
6.2. Informative References 6.2. Informative References
[802.1ak] "IEEE 802.1ak - Multiple Registration Protocol",
<http://www.ieee802.org/1/pages/802.1ak.html>.
[CGMP] "Cisco Group Management Protocol", [CGMP] "Cisco Group Management Protocol",
<http://www.javvin.com/protocolCGMP.html>. <http://www.javvin.com/protocolCGMP.html>.
[GMRP] "GARP Multicast Registration Protocol", [GMRP] "GARP Multicast Registration Protocol",
<http://www.javvin.com/protocolGMRP.html>. <http://www.javvin.com/protocolGMRP.html>.
[I-D.daley-magma-smld-prob] [I-D.daley-magma-smld-prob]
Daley, G. and G. Kurup, "Trust Models and Security in Daley, G. and G. Kurup, "Trust Models and Security in
Multicast Listener Discovery", Multicast Listener Discovery",
draft-daley-magma-smld-prob-00 (work in progress), draft-daley-magma-smld-prob-00 (work in progress),
July 2004. July 2004.
[I-D.ietf-idmr-dvmrp-v3]
Pusateri, T., "Distance Vector Multicast Routing
Protocol", draft-ietf-idmr-dvmrp-v3-11 (work in progress),
December 2003.
[I-D.ietf-idmr-dvmrp-v3-as] [I-D.ietf-idmr-dvmrp-v3-as]
Pusateri, T., "Distance Vector Multicast Routing Protocol Pusateri, T., "Distance Vector Multicast Routing Protocol
Applicability Statement", draft-ietf-idmr-dvmrp-v3-as-01 Applicability Statement", draft-ietf-idmr-dvmrp-v3-as-01
(work in progress), May 2004. (work in progress), May 2004.
[I-D.ietf-idr-rfc2858bis] [I-D.ietf-l2vpn-vpls-pim-snooping]
Bates, T., "Multiprotocol Extensions for BGP-4", Hemige, V., "PIM Snooping over VPLS",
draft-ietf-idr-rfc2858bis-10 (work in progress), draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-pim-snooping-00 (work in progress),
March 2006. August 2006.
[I-D.ietf-magma-igmp-proxy] [I-D.ietf-magma-igmp-proxy]
Fenner, B., He, H., Haberman, B., and H. Sandick, "IGMP/ Fenner, B., He, H., Haberman, B., and H. Sandick, "IGMP/
MLD-based Multicast Forwarding ('IGMP/MLD Proxying')", MLD-based Multicast Forwarding ('IGMP/MLD Proxying')",
draft-ietf-magma-igmp-proxy-06 (work in progress), draft-ietf-magma-igmp-proxy-06 (work in progress),
April 2004. April 2004.
[I-D.ietf-mboned-ipv6-multicast-issues] [I-D.ietf-mboned-ipv6-multicast-issues]
Savola, P., "IPv6 Multicast Deployment Issues", Savola, P., "IPv6 Multicast Deployment Issues",
draft-ietf-mboned-ipv6-multicast-issues-02 (work in draft-ietf-mboned-ipv6-multicast-issues-02 (work in
skipping to change at page 21, line 9 skipping to change at page 21, line 25
Lehtonen, R., "Requirements for discovery of dynamic SSM Lehtonen, R., "Requirements for discovery of dynamic SSM
sources", draft-lehtonen-mboned-dynssm-req-00 (work in sources", draft-lehtonen-mboned-dynssm-req-00 (work in
progress), February 2005. progress), February 2005.
[I-D.savola-pim-lasthop-threats] [I-D.savola-pim-lasthop-threats]
Lingard, J. and P. Savola, "Last-hop Threats to Protocol Lingard, J. and P. Savola, "Last-hop Threats to Protocol
Independent Multicast (PIM)", Independent Multicast (PIM)",
draft-savola-pim-lasthop-threats-02 (work in progress), draft-savola-pim-lasthop-threats-02 (work in progress),
June 2006. June 2006.
[I-D.serbest-l2vpn-vpls-mcast]
Serbest, Y., "Supporting IP Multicast over VPLS",
draft-serbest-l2vpn-vpls-mcast-03 (work in progress),
July 2005.
[I-D.tsenevir-pim-sm-snoop]
Senevirathne, T. and S. Vallepali, "Protocol Independent
Multicast-Sparse Mode (PIM-SM) Snooping",
draft-tsenevir-pim-sm-snoop-00 (work in progress),
April 2002.
[RFC1075] Waitzman, D., Partridge, C., and S. Deering, "Distance [RFC1075] Waitzman, D., Partridge, C., and S. Deering, "Distance
Vector Multicast Routing Protocol", RFC 1075, Vector Multicast Routing Protocol", RFC 1075,
November 1988. November 1988.
[RFC1584] Moy, J., "Multicast Extensions to OSPF", RFC 1584, [RFC1584] Moy, J., "Multicast Extensions to OSPF", RFC 1584,
March 1994. March 1994.
[RFC1585] Moy, J., "MOSPF: Analysis and Experience", RFC 1585, [RFC1585] Moy, J., "MOSPF: Analysis and Experience", RFC 1585,
March 1994. March 1994.
 End of changes. 24 change blocks. 
47 lines changed or deleted 46 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.32. The latest version is available from http://www.levkowetz.com/ietf/tools/rfcdiff/