draft-ietf-mboned-anycast-rp-04.txt   draft-ietf-mboned-anycast-rp-05.txt 
MBONED Working Group Dorian Kim MBONED Working Group Dorian Kim
Internet Draft Verio Internet Draft Verio
David Meyer David Meyer
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
Henry Kilmer Henry Kilmer
Dino Farinacci Dino Farinacci
Procket Networks Procket Networks
Category Informational Category Informational
December, 1999 January, 2000
Anycast RP mechanism using PIM and MSDP Anycast RP mechanism using PIM and MSDP
<draft-ietf-mboned-anycast-rp-04.txt> <draft-ietf-mboned-anycast-rp-05.txt>
1. Status of this Memo 1. Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
all provisions of Section 10 of RFC Internet-Drafts. all provisions of Section 10 of RFC Internet-Drafts.
2026 are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force 2026 are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force
(IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups
may also distribute working documents as Internet- Drafts. may also distribute working documents as Internet- Drafts.
skipping to change at page 2, line 17 skipping to change at page 2, line 17
This document describes a mechanism to allow for an arbitrary number This document describes a mechanism to allow for an arbitrary number
of RPs per group in a single shared-tree PIM-SM domain. of RPs per group in a single shared-tree PIM-SM domain.
This memo is a product of the MBONE Deployment Working Group (MBONED) This memo is a product of the MBONE Deployment Working Group (MBONED)
in the Operations and Management Area of the Internet Engineering in the Operations and Management Area of the Internet Engineering
Task Force. Submit comments to <mboned@ns.uoregon.edu> or the Task Force. Submit comments to <mboned@ns.uoregon.edu> or the
authors. authors.
3. Copyright Notice 3. Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1999). All Rights Reserved. Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2000). All Rights Reserved.
4. Introduction 4. Introduction
PIM-SM as defined in RFC 2352 allows for only a single active RP per PIM-SM as defined in RFC 2352 allows for only a single active RP per
group, and as such the decision of optimal RP placement can become group, and as such the decision of optimal RP placement can become
problematic for a multi-regional network deploying PIM-SM. problematic for a multi-regional network deploying PIM-SM.
Anycast RP relaxes an important constraint in PIM-SM, namely, that Anycast RP relaxes an important constraint in PIM-SM, namely, that
there can be only one group to RP mapping active at any time. The there can be only one group to RP mapping active at any time. The
single mapping property has several implications, including traffic single mapping property has several implications, including traffic
skipping to change at page 6, line 27 skipping to change at page 6, line 27
routing system. routing system.
7.1.1. Effects of Unicast Routing Instability 7.1.1. Effects of Unicast Routing Instability
While not a security issue, it is worth noting that if unicast While not a security issue, it is worth noting that if unicast
routing is unstable, then the actual RP that source or receiver is routing is unstable, then the actual RP that source or receiver is
using will be subject to the same instability. using will be subject to the same instability.
7.2. Multicast Protocol Integrity 7.2. Multicast Protocol Integrity
The mechanisms described in [PIMAUTH] should be used to provide The mechanisms described in [RFC2362] should be used to provide
protocol message integrity protection and group-wise message origin protocol message integrity protection and group-wise message origin
authentication. authentication.
7.3. MSDP Peer Integrity 7.3. MSDP Peer Integrity
As is the the case for BGP, MSDP peers can be protected using keyed As is the the case for BGP, MSDP peers can be protected using keyed
MD5 [RFC1828]. MD5 [RFC1828].
8. Acknowledgments 8. Acknowledgments
John Meylor, Bill Fenner, Dave Thaler and Tom Pusateri provided John Meylor, Bill Fenner, Dave Thaler and Tom Pusateri provided
insightful comments on earlier versions for this idea. insightful comments on earlier versions for this idea.
9. References 9. References
[MSDP] D. Farinacci, et. al., "Multicast Source Discovery [MSDP] D. Farinacci, et. al., "Multicast Source Discovery
Protocol (MSDP)", draft-ietf-msdp-spec-02.txt, Protocol (MSDP)", draft-ietf-msdp-spec-02.txt,
November, 1999. January, 2000. Work in Progress.
[PIMAUTH] L. Wei, et al., "Authenticating PIM version 2 messages",
draft-ietf-pim-v2-auth-00.txt, November, 1998.
[RFC1825] Atkinson, R., "IP Security Architecture", August 1995. [RFC1825] Atkinson, R., "IP Security Architecture", August 1995.
[RFC1828] P. Metzger and W. Simpson, "IP Authentication using Keyed [RFC1828] P. Metzger and W. Simpson, "IP Authentication using Keyed
MD5", RFC 1828, August, 1995. MD5", RFC 1828, August, 1995.
[RFC2362] D. Estrin, et. al., "Protocol Independent Multicast- [RFC2362] D. Estrin, et. al., "Protocol Independent Multicast-
Sparse Mode (PIM-SM): Protocol Specification", RFC Sparse Mode (PIM-SM): Protocol Specification", RFC
2362, June, 1998. 2362, June, 1998.
 End of changes. 

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.23, available from http://www.levkowetz.com/ietf/tools/rfcdiff/