Re: ISP scenarios comments (multicast)

[Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>]

On Thu, 19 Sep 2002, Brian Haberman wrote:
> > For one perspective, look at one PIM-domain at:
> > 
> > http://sem2.renater.fr/m6bone/
> > 
> > Multicast works -- kinda.
> 
> Yes, I have looked at their network before.  Interesting.  I am
> assuming that they are not using site-locals.

Yes, they're not using site-locals, but some parties would like to use 
site-locals in addition to globals -- and that's impossible at the moment 
with current implementations.

We use unicast prefix-based addresses there btw.

> > Which field?  Destination address could include the address of the RP,
> > with some rather strict assumptions.
> 
> I was talking about the prefix field in the multicast address.  There
> are not enough bits to represent an RP unless you did some interesting
> address assignments for RPs and can encode the entire address in 64
> bits.

Both are doable.  One idea I've been toying with is specifying some
default suffix values (for example), and including a 16-bit(?) hash of the
RP's full address to be able for the recipients to verify the guess.

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "Tell me of difficulties surmounted,
Netcore Oy                   not those you stumble over and fall"
Systems. Networks. Security.  -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords