draft-ietf-pim-join-attributes-03.txt   draft-ietf-pim-join-attributes-04.txt 
PIM WG A. Boers PIM WG Arjen Boers
Internet-Draft IJ. Wijnands Internet Draft IJsbrand Wijnands
Intended status: Informational E. Rosen Intended Status: Proposed Standard Eric C. Rosen
Expires: November 21, 2007 Cisco Systems, Inc. Expires: December 30, 2008 Cisco Systems, Inc.
May 20, 2007
Format for using TLVs in PIM messages June 30, 2008
draft-ietf-pim-join-attributes-03
The PIM Join Attribute Format
draft-ietf-pim-join-attributes-04.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 35 skipping to change at page 1, line 37
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 November 21, 2007.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
Abstract Abstract
This document describes a generic TLV attribute encoding format to be A Protocol Independent Multicast (PIM) Join message sent by a given
added to PIM join messages. node identifies one or more multicast distribution trees that that
node wishes to join. Each tree is identified by a multicast group
address and a source address, which is possibly a "wild card". Under
certain conditions it can be useful, when joining a tree, to specify
additional information related to the construction of the tree.
However, there is up to now no way to do so. This document describes
a modification of the Join message that allows a node to associate
attributes with a particular tree. The attributes are encoded in
Type-Length-Value format.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Conventions used in this document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1 Specification of requirements ......................... 2
2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2 Introduction .......................................... 3
3. Use of the Attribute Field in Join Messages . . . . . . . . . . 3 3 Use of Join Attributes ................................ 4
3.1. Attribute join . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3.1 Sending Join Attributes ............................... 4
3.2. Transitive attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3.2 The Join Attribute Option in the PIM Hello ............ 4
3.3. Attribute Hello Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3.3 Receiving Join Attributes ............................. 5
3.4. Conflicting attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.3.1 General Considerations ................................ 5
3.5. Attribute Convergence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.3.2 Transitive and Non-Transitive Attributes .............. 5
3.6. Multiple attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.3.3 Conflicting Attributes ................................ 6
3.7. Applicability of the attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.3.4 Attribute Change ...................................... 7
3.8. PIM attribute packet format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.4 PIM Attribute Packet Format ........................... 8
3.8.1. PIM Join packet format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.4.1 PIM Join Packet Format ................................ 8
3.8.2. PIM Attribute Hello option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.4.2 PIM Join Attribute Hello Option ....................... 9
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4 IANA Considerations ................................... 9
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5 Security Considerations ............................... 10
6. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 6 Acknowledgments ....................................... 10
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 7 Authors' Addresses .................................... 10
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 8 Normative References .................................. 11
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 9 Informative References ................................ 11
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 10 Full Copyright Statement .............................. 11
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 9 11 Intellectual Property ................................. 11
1. Conventions used in this document 1. Specification of requirements
In this document, the key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
and "OPTIONAL" are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 and document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
indicate requirement levels for compliant PIM-SM implementations.
2. Introduction 2. Introduction
It is sometimes convenient to add additional information to PIM join A Protocol Independent Multicast (PIM) Join message sent by a given
messages. The generic PIM encoding format is not always optimal to node may identify one or more multicast distribution trees that that
do this. This document defines a new field in the PIM Join message node wishes to join. Each tree is identified by a multicast group
that allows it to use TLVs, hereby called the attribute field. The address and a source address, which is possibly a "wild card". Under
content and purpose of this attribute field is outside the scope of certain conditions it can be useful, when joining a tree, to specify
this document, only the generic encoding format is described here. additional information related to the construction of the tree.
However, there is up to now no way to do so. This document describes
a modification of the Join message that allows a node to associate an
attribute, encoded in Type-Length-Value (TLV) format, with a
particular tree that it wishes to join. These attributes are known
as "PIM Join Attributes".
3. Use of the Attribute Field in Join Messages In the PIM Join message, the Source Address is identified by being
encoded as an "Encoded-Source Address" ([RFC4601], section 4.9.1).
Each Encoded-Source Address occurs in the context of a particular
group address, represented as an "Encoded-Group Address". Together
the Encoded-Source Address and the Encoded-Group Address identify a
multicast distribution tree. The Encoded-Source Address contains an
"encoding type" field. The only value defined in [RFC4601] is 0.
This specification is the first to assign another encoding type
value.
3.1. Attribute join In order to associate TLVs with a particular tree, this specification
defines a new encoding type for the Encoded-Source address, type 1.
When type 1 is used, the Encoded-Source Address may contain a
sequence of "Join Attributes", each of which is encoded as a TLV.
Then the type 1 Encoded-Source Address, in the context of the
associated Encoded-Group Address, identifies a multicast distribution
tree, and also specifies (via the Join Attribute TLVs) the attributes
that apply to the tree. Apart from the fact that the type 1 Encoded-
Source Address may contain Join Attributes, it is otherwise identical
to the type 0 Encoded-Source Address.
Attribute fields are defined similar to the PIM source encoding type This document does not contain the specification for any particular
as defined in [RFC4601]. A source address without any additional Join Attribute. It specifies how Join Attributes are to be encoded
TLV's should be processed identically to a source address in the into the Join messages, and it specifies generic procedures that are
default source encoding. common to all Join Attributes. The content and purpose of any
particular Join Attribute is outside the scope of this document.
Multiple TLV's from the same or different type are permitted in a The use of Join Attributes in "Dense Mode" PIM is not considered.
single source address in any order.
3.2. Transitive attributes 3. Use of Join Attributes
It may be desired to have routers that understand the generic 3.1. Sending Join Attributes
attribute format, forward the attributes regardless of whether they
understand the TLV's encoded in the attribute not. For this the
first bit in the Type field is reserved. If this bit is set then the
router MUST forward the TLV upstream in case the router does not
understand that type. If this bit is not set the router MUST NOT
forward the TLV upstream in the case the router does not understand
that type.
3.3. Attribute Hello Option Join Attributes are encoded as TLVs into the Encoded-Source Address
field of a PIM Join message, as specified in section 3.3.1 below.
Each attribute applies to same multicast distribution tree that is
identified by the combination of the Encoded-Source Address and the
associated Encoded-Group address. The multicast distribution tree
may be either a source-specific tree or a shared tree.
A new PIM source type has been defined to include the Attribute The encoding of the "source address" field within the Encoded-Source
field. This source type is included in a normal PIM Join. Each Address is exactly the same for a type 1 Encoded-Source Address as
router on a connected network needs to be able to understand and for a type 0 Encoded-Source Address, as specified in [RFC4601].
parse the Join message. Therefore we include a new PIM hello option
to advertise our capability to parse and process the new source type.
We can only send a PIM Join which includes an attribute if ALL A type 1 Encoded-Source Address MUST contain at least one Join
routers on the network support the new option. (Even a router which Attribute. The way to specify that there are no Join Attributes for
is not the upstream neighbor must be able parse to the packet in a particular tree is to use the type 0 Encoded-Source Address.
order to do Join suppression or overriding.) Option value TBD.
Having the attribute hello option does not guarantee that all Multiple Join Attributes of the same type or of different types may
neighbors understand all possible individual attributes. As there's occur within a single Encoded-Source Address. This specification
no immediate way to act on a neighbor's incapability to process does not require all attributes of a given type to occur
contiguously. There is no header field that specifies the number of
attributes; rather the last attribute is specially marked as such.
Any PIM router that does not understand the type 1 Encoded-Source
Address will not be able to process a PIM Join message that contains
it. Further, if the use of any particular Join Attribute affects the
construction of the multicast distribution tree, the tree may not be
formed correctly unless the attribute is understood by all PIM
routers that receive it. As a consequence, attributes are only
useful within a single administrative domain (or perhaps a small set
of contiguous, cooperating administrative domains) where it can be
determined apriori that all deployed PIM routers understand the type
1 Encoded-Source address, as well as whatever specific attributes are
in use.
3.2. The Join Attribute Option in the PIM Hello
To ensure that a type 1 Encoded-Source Address is not sent to a PIM
neighbor that does not understand this encoding, a new PIM Hello
option, the "Join Attribute" option, is defined. This option must be
included in the PIM Hello's of any PIM router that is willing to
receive type 1 Encoded-Source Address. A PIM router MUST NOT send a
type 1 Encoded-Source Address to any PIM neighbor that has not
included this option in its Hellos.
Note that a PIM router that sends the "Join Attribute" Hello option
does not necessarily understand every possible attribute type. As
there is no immediate way to act on a neighbor's inability to process
certain attribute types, it is not desired to have a hello option for certain attribute types, it is not desired to have a hello option for
each possible attribute type. each possible attribute type.
3.4. Conflicting attributes 3.3. Receiving Join Attributes
It's possible that a router receives conflicting attribute 3.3.1. General Considerations
A PIM router that receives a type 1 Encoded-Source Address MUST
process the first attribute in it. The result of processing that
attribute may affect the following:
- the construction of the associated multicast distribution tree
- the processing of subsequent attributes of the same type that
also occur in the type 1 Encoded-Source Address
- the forwarding (or not) of the attribute itself and/or
subsequently occurring attributes of the same type.
If multiple types of attribute occur in a type 1 Encoded-Source
Address, the first attribute of each type MUST be processed.
3.3.2. Transitive and Non-Transitive Attributes
If a PIM router understands a particular attribute type, the
attribute is processed as specified above.
If a PIM router does not understand the type of a particular
attribute, the PIM router either forwards that attribute or discards
it, depending upon the setting of the attribute's F-bit. If the F-
bit is set, then the router MUST forward the attribute; if the F-bit
is clear, then the router MUST discard it.
If one or more non-transitive attributes are discarded, the rest of
the Join Attributes (if any) are still forwarded. If there are no
Join Attributes left to forward, a Join with a type 0 Encoded-Source
Address field would be forwarded.
3.3.3. Conflicting Attributes
It is possible that a router receives conflicting attribute
information from different downstream routers. Conflicts only occur information from different downstream routers. Conflicts only occur
with attributes of the same type. If two different attributes of two with attributes of the same type.
different types are received they should both be processed and
forwarded.
( Edge A1 ) ( Edge B1 )---- [R1] ( Edge A1 ) ( Edge B1 )---- [R1]
/ \ / / \ /
/ \ / / \ /
[S] ( Core ) [S] ( Core )
\ / \ \ / \
\ / \ \ / \
( Edge A2 ) ( Edge B2 )---- [R2] ( Edge A2 ) ( Edge B2 )---- [R2]
Figure 2 Figure 2
An example join attribute in this case is an exit router. There are As an example, consider Figure 2, and suppose a join attribute is
2 receivers for the same group connected to Edge B1 and B2. Suppose used to indicate a choice of exit router. There are 2 receivers for
that edge router B1 prefers A1 as the exit point and B2 prefers A2 as the same group connected to Edge B1 and B2. Suppose that edge router
exit point to reach the source S. If both Edge B1 and B2 send a Join B1 prefers A1 as the exit point and B2 prefers A2 as exit point to
including an attribute to prefer their exit router in the network and reach the source S. If both Edge B1 and B2 send a Join including an
they cross the same core router, the core router will get conflicting attribute to prefer their exit router in the network and they cross
attribute information for the source. If this happens we use the the same core router, the core router will get conflicting attribute
Attribute from the PIM adjacency with the numerically smallest IP information for the source. If this happens we use the Attribute from
address. In the case of IPv6, the link local address will be used. the PIM adjacency with the numerically smallest IP address. In the
When two neighbors have the same IP address, either for IPv4 or IPv6, case of IPv6, the link local address will be used. When two neighbors
the interface index must be used as a tie breaker. The attributes have the same IP address, either for IPv4 or IPv6, the interface
from other sending routers may be kept around in case the best index must be used as a tie breaker. The attributes from other
attribute gets pruned or expires, we are able to immediately use the sending routers MAY be remembered; then if the best attribute gets
second best attribute and converge quickly without waiting for the pruned or expires, we are able to immediately use the second best
next periodic update. If a TLV has its own definition for conflict attribute and converge quickly without waiting for the next periodic
resolution it is preferred over the conflict resolution above. update.
3.5. Attribute Convergence When a particular attribute type is specified, the specification MAY
include a conflict resolution procedure specific to that type. If
so, that conflict resolution procedure would be used instead of the
described in this section.
An attribute is included in a PIM Join message together with the The conflict resolution procedure described in this section is also
source information. If the attribute for this source is changed, we used by a router if there are conflicting transitive attributes that
trigger a new PIM Join message to the upstream router. This causes the router does not understand.
the new attribute to be propagated. This new attribute implicitly
removes the old attribute upstream. If processing the new attribute
results in a change in the distribution tree, a PIM Prune message may
be sent. This PIM Prune does not need to carry any attribute, the
sender of the prune and the source and group information is enough to
identify the entry. The attribute information is removed immediately
and possibly a new attribute is chosen from the database if
available.
3.6. Multiple attributes 3.3.4. Attribute Change
A PIM Join can contain multiple attributes. The attributes are A PIM router may decide to change the set of attributes it has
encoded as TLVs associated with a new PIM source type in the PIM associated with a given multicast distribution tree. This can happen
message. When a PIM Join with multiple attributes is received, each if one of its downstream neighbors on the tree has changed the set of
type is processed separately. For each type, the first attribute of attributes. It can also happen as a result of processing the
that type is processed, and the action taken depends upon the type. attributes. It can also happen for reasons outside the scope of this
This may or may not result in the processing of the next attribute. specification (such as a change in configuration.)
Attributes that the router understands but are not processed MUST be
passed upstream unchanged.
3.7. Applicability of the attributes If a PIM router needs to change the set of attributes for a given
tree, but does not change its upstream neighbor for that tree, it
MUST send a new Join for that tree, specifying the new set of
attributes. If the new set of attributes is the null set, the type 0
Encoded-Source format MUST be used.
PIM Joins with attributes can be applied to both shared-trees rooted If a PIM router needs to change the set of attributes for a given
at a Rendezvous Point (RP) and shortest-path trees as described in tree, and as a result changes its upstream neighbor for that tree, it
[RFC4601]. sends a Prune to the old upstream neighbor. The Prune does not need
to carry any attributes.
3.8. PIM attribute packet format When a PIM router receives a Join for a given tree, and the Join does
not contain exactly the same set of attributes as the prior Join, the
set of attributes in the new Join becomes the entire new set of
attributes. No attribute information from the prior Join is
retained. There is no way to advertise incremental changes to the
set of attributes; any attributes that are no longer present are
considered to have been withdrawn. If, as the result of receiving a
Join, a PIM router determines that the set of attributes has changed,
it will need to send a new Join upstream, with the new set of
attributes. (Of course, the procedures for resolving attribute
conflicts may need to be applied first.)
3.8.1. PIM Join packet format When a PIM router R1 receives a Prune for a given tree from a given
downstream neighbor R2, where R2 had previously sent attributes
applying to that tree, those attributes are considered to have been
withdrawn. Depending on the attributes that R1 has received from its
other downstream neighbors (if any) on the tree, R1 may determine
that the set of attributes applying to the tree has changed, in which
case it needs to send a new Join, with the new attribute set, to its
upstream neighbor on the tree.
3.4. PIM Attribute Packet Format
3.4.1. PIM Join Packet Format
There is no space in the default PIM source encoding to include a There is no space in the default PIM source encoding to include a
attribute field. Therefore we introduce a new source encoding type. attribute field. Therefore we introduce a new source encoding type.
The attributes are formatted as TLV's. The new Encoded source The attributes are formatted as TLV's. The new Encoded source address
address looks like this: looks like this:
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Addr Family | Encoding Type | Rsrvd |S|W|R| Mask Len | | Addr Family | Encoding Type | Rsrvd |S|W|R| Mask Len |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Source Address (Encoded-Source format) | | Source Address
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|F|S| Type | Length | Value
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+..... +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+.....
|F|S| Type | Length | Value |F|E| Attr Type | Length | Value
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+.....
|F|E| Attr_Type | Length | Value
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+..... +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+.....
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
F bit, Forward Unknown TLV. If this bit is set the TLV is forwarded - Encoding Type: 1
regardless if the router understands the Type.
S bit, Bottom of Stack. If this bit is set then this is the last TLV - F bit, Transitive Attribute
in the stack.
Type field of the TLV is 6 bits. If this bit is set, the attribute is a transitive attribute;
otherwise it is a non-transitive attribute. See section 3.3.2.
Length field of the TLV is 1 byte. - E bit, End of Attributes. If this bit is set then this is the
last Join Attribute appearing in this Encoded-Source Address
field.
The other fields are the same as described in the RFC 4601. - "Attr_Type", a 6-bit field identifying the type of the Attribute.
[RFC4601].
The source TLV encoding type: TBD. - Length field, a 1 octet field specifying the length in octets of
the value field.
3.8.2. PIM Attribute Hello option The other fields are the same as described in [RFC4601].
3.4.2. PIM Join Attribute Hello Option
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| OptionType = TBD | OptionLength = 0 | | OptionType = 26 | OptionLength = 0 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Option type: TBD. Option type: 26.
4. IANA Considerations 4. IANA Considerations
A new IANA registry is needed for PIM Join Attributes Types. A new IANA registry is needed for "PIM Join Attribute Types". These
Additionally, a new PIM Hello value needs to be obtained from the PIM are values of the "Attr_Type" field depicted in section 3.3.1.
Hello Option values 17 through 65000 assigned by the IANA. Assignments are to be made according to the policy "IETF Review" as
defined in [RFC5226].
The PIM Hello Option value 26 should be assigned by IANA to the "Join
Attribute" option, with this document as the reference. [Assuming
that 26 is still available.]
[RFC4601] should have, but did not, create a registry for the
"Encoding Type" field of the Encoded-Source Address format defined
therein. IANA should set up a registry for this, referencing
[RFC4601]. Assignments should be made according to the policy "IETF
Review" as defined in [RFC5226]. Two encoding types should be
defined:
- The encoding type 0 should be allocated, defined as "native
encoding for the address family", and [RFC4601] should be the
reference.
- The encoding type 1 should be allocated, defined as "native
encoding for the address family, but with zero or more PIM Join
Attributes present", and this document should be the reference.
5. Security Considerations 5. Security Considerations
Security of the join attribute is only guaranteed by the security of Security of the join attribute is only guaranteed by the security of
the PIM packet, so the security considerations for PIM join packets the PIM packet, so the security considerations for PIM join packets
as described in PIM-SM [RFC4601] apply here. as described in [RFC4601] apply here. Additional security
considerations may apply to specific attributes; if so, these will
need to be documented in the specification of those attributes.
Security considerations from [RFC5015] may apply as well.
6. Acknowledgments 6. Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Stig Venaas, James Lingard, Bharat The authors would like to thank Stig Venaas, James Lingard, Bharat
Joshi, Marshall Eubanks, Pekka Savola and Tom Pusateri for their Joshi, Marshall Eubanks, Pekka Savola, Tom Pusateri, and Elwyn Davies
input. for their input.
7. References
7.1. Normative References
[RFC4601] Fenner, B., Handley, M., Holbrook, H., and I. Kouvelas,
"Protocol Independent Multicast - Sparse Mode (PIM-SM):
Protocol Specification (Revised)", RFC 4601, August 2006.
7.2. Informative References
Authors' Addresses 7. Authors' Addresses
Arjen Boers Arjen Boers
Cisco Systems, Inc. Cisco Systems, Inc.
Avda. Diagonal, 682 Avda. Diagnoal, 682
Barcelona 08034 Barcelona 08034
Spain
Email: aboers@cisco.com E-mail: aboers@cisco.com
IJsbrand Wijnands IJsbrand Wijnands
Cisco Systems, Inc. Cisco Systems, Inc.
De kleetlaan 6a De kleetlaan 6a
Diegem 1831 Diegem 1831
Belgium Belgium
Email: ice@cisco.com E-mail: ice@cisco.com
Eric Rosen
Eric C. Rosen
Cisco Systems, Inc. Cisco Systems, Inc.
1414 Massachusetts Avenue 1414 Massachusetts Avenue
Boxborough, Ma 01719 Boxborough, MA, 01719
Email: erosen@cisco.com E-mail: erosen@cisco.com
Full Copyright Statement 8. Normative References
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007). [RFC2119] "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels",
S. Bradner, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC4601] Fenner, B., Handley, M., Holbrook, H., and I. Kouvelas,
"Protocol Independent Multicast - Sparse Mode (PIM-SM): Protocol
Specification (Revised)", RFC 4601, August 2006.
9. Informative References
[RFC5015] "Bidirectional Protocol Independent Multicast", M. Handley,
I. Kouvelas, T. Speakman, L. Vicisano, RFC 5015, October 2007.
[RFC5226] "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in
RFCs", T. Narten, H. Alvestrand, RFC 5226, May 2008.
10. Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008).
This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
retain all their rights. retain all their rights.
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND
THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS
OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF
THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Intellectual Property 11. Intellectual Property
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
skipping to change at page 9, line 44 skipping to change at line 466
attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
http://www.ietf.org/ipr. http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at
ietf-ipr@ietf.org. ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
Acknowledgment
Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
Administrative Support Activity (IASA).
 End of changes. 57 change blocks. 
170 lines changed or deleted 305 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.35. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/