Snooping switches would certainly be a good reason to prefer MLD proxying over PIM in homenet. There could be other reasons like reducing codeside (thats Pierre pet reason ;-). But trying to be compatible with snooping switches also implies that improvements in MLD that we might wnat then for homenet would break interoperability with that L2 equipment, because you must assume this L2 equipment will only correctly react to MLD message and message sequences as they have been defined 8 years ago.
So foremost, it would be good to understand if there really is home L2 equipment that MUST see MLD to operate correctly. Otherwise i'd happily ignore the problem and say there is enough bandwidth to just NOT DO snooping but have multicast be flooded in the L2 segments. I only remember vaguely one old data point that seemed to indicate that some powerline equipment was doing snooping and you couldn't switch it off. can't find the pointers to this data point though. Would love to know if any powerline standards exist and what they say about MLD... Worst case, whatever the preferred solution for IP multicast is in homenet, if we identify that there is L2 equipment that MUST get MLD, we need to ALSO have homenet routers send out MLDv1/v2 backward compatible MLD messages to keep that L2 equipment happy. That is also pretty much what we do in commercial environments too, for example in satellite links where we really want to connect router-to-router signaling with PIM, but those routers are set up to ALSO send IGMP/MLD to keep the satellite modems happy. Toerless On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 07:22:34PM +0100, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > On Thu, 19 Feb 2015, Ted Lemon wrote: > > >On Feb 19, 2015, at 1:08 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson <swm...@swm.pp.se> wrote: > >>I would like my router-to-router links to not have a lot of hosts in them > >>if I can avoid it. > > > >Why is that? > > If we're going to be routing multicast within the home, we're most likely > going to have to use some kind of variant of PIM. Asking the L2 switches > people connect to the router to support both PIM and MLD snooping seem > like it might be asking too much. > > I might be wrong though. > > -- > Mikael Abrahamsson email: swm...@swm.pp.se > > _______________________________________________ > homenet mailing list > homenet@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet -- --- Toerless Eckert, eck...@cisco.com _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
