Hi
On 9/22/2014 2:41 PM, Sander Steffann wrote:
Hi Andrew,
Please help me understand.
The standards' purpose is to facilitate the interoperability.
"MLD snooping" happens within a single device.
Its only result in a correct implementation must be "if you join the
group, you should get the traffic, if you did not, you should not"
function.
Aren't the existing documents sufficient? See
RFC 4541
RFC 4605
and also this is related
draft-ietf-pim-explicit-tracking-10
Stig
A result of composition of multiple independent correct
implementations of this function remains the same - "if you join the
group, you should get the traffic, if you did not, you should not".
So, which undefined behaviors that prevent the interop today do you
think would need to be standardized ?
Maybe it's as simple as writing down what you described :) Standards don't
have to be complicated. Maybe it can describe how a device should operate in
certain failure scenarios like when 1000 hosts join 500 multicast groups each
and the switch runs out of memory/CPU/etc. The most 'interesting'
interoperability problems occur when different devices behave in different ways
in weird situations :)
And maybe it is just as simple as you describe :)
Cheers,
Sander
