Hi Gerrit,

Gerrit van Niekerk wrote:
The question is directly related to ND and DAD because the "joining of the link-
local scope multicast groups" is specified in RFC2461 and RFC2462. It is now clear to me that the reason is to inform MLD snooping switches rather than routers about the multicast listening node.


I would suggest adding a definition of "join a multicast group" in the TERMINOLOGY section and a single sentence reason where the "join" is used e.g. in RFC2461bis:

7.2.1.  Interface Initialization

When a multicast-capable interface becomes enabled the node MUST join
the all-nodes multicast address on that interface, as well as the
solicited-node multicast address corresponding to each of the IP
addresses assigned to the interface in order to inform bridging devices like MLD snooping switches of the multicast listener.

While this make the issue clearer, it will be hard to avoid a new (informative?) reference to the IGMP/MLD snooping draft. Since this is not yet an RFC there may be some problem (possibly not if the reference is informative).

I'm not sure if this needs to be avoided.

Additionally, the only multicast group which doesn't need
MLD signalling is all-hosts.  So we may need to make a
distinction here.

In any case, it may be more generic to have a statement such as:
(modifying your paragraph):


7.2.1. Interface Initialization

   When a multicast-capable interface becomes enabled the node MUST join
   the all-nodes multicast address on that interface, as well as the
   solicited-node multicast address corresponding to each of the IP
   addresses assigned to the interface.  Joining a solicited-node's
   group requires sending of MLD reports to inform devices within the
   local link of the multicast listener's presence[MLDv2(?1?)].



I'm not sure if this is any better.

Greg



--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to