Multicast Routing Blackhole Avoidance
draft-asati-pim-multicast-routing-blackhole-avoid-00
Document | Type |
Expired Internet-Draft
(individual)
Expired & archived
|
|
---|---|---|---|
Authors | Rajiv Asati , Mike McBride | ||
Last updated | 2008-07-06 | ||
RFC stream | (None) | ||
Intended RFC status | (None) | ||
Formats | |||
Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
IESG | IESG state | Expired | |
Telechat date | (None) | ||
Responsible AD | (None) | ||
Send notices to | (None) |
This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft is available in these formats:
Abstract
This document specifies a mechanism to avoid blackholing of IP Multicast traffic due to the disruption of multicast tree during the time when the RPF neighbor is yet to become the PIM neighbor. Such scenario is possible during the topology change (e.g. link UP) in an IP network that employs PIM-SM (or SSM) as the multicast routing protocol and a unicast routing protocol (including static routing). Conventions used in this document In examples, "C:" and "S:" indicate lines sent by the client and server respectively. The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC2119 [RFC2119].
Authors
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)