Thanks both I't's more clear now Ric
> CC: dim0...@hotmail.com; juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net > From: st...@acm.org > Subject: Re: R: Re: R: Re: [j-nsp] Same multicast group from the source > Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2012 20:13:27 -0700 > To: ch...@chrishellberg.com > > Since it is IGMP v2, the receiver will send a (*,G) membership report. This > will cause traffic for both S1 > and S2 to be received and the receiver will have to ignore the unwanted > channel. > > My understanding of the OPs request was to be able to have the receiver > receive S1, and not receive S2. That can be accomplished by using the > ssm-map-policy to convert the (*,224.1.1.1) membership report to a > (1.1.1.1,224.1.1.1) PIM join. > > --Stacy > > > On Nov 22, 2012, at 3:15 PM, ch...@chrishellberg.com wrote: > > > Almost right. The bit that ssm mapping does is take a igmpv2 group reports > > and maps them into a PIM-SSM towards the source(s). Thus no need for an > > RP....as if the request were igmpv3 > > > > Been years since I've looked at this but from memory you don't even need to > > do ssm mapping since the rp should join both sources and you'll get a > > multiplexed stream, which is what you want. If I understand correctly. > > > > /chris > > --- > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Riccardo S <dim0...@hotmail.com> > > Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2012 21:47:24 > > To: <ch...@chrishellberg.com>; Stacy W. Smith<st...@acm.org> > > Cc: <juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net> > > Subject: R: Re: R: Re: [j-nsp] Same multicast group from the source > > > > As far as i know ssm works with igmp3 > > With igmp2 you need to go through rp... > > > > sent with Android > > > > ch...@chrishellberg.com ha scritto: > > > >> Yes it does > >> --- > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Riccardo S <dim0...@hotmail.com> > >> Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2012 20:56:43 > >> To: Stacy W. Smith<st...@acm.org> > >> Cc: <ch...@chrishellberg.com>; <juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net> > >> Subject: R: Re: [j-nsp] Same multicast group from the source > >> > >> I cannot force my customer to use igmpv3.... > >> Do not think it works with igmpv2 > >> > >> sent with Android > >> > >> "Stacy W. Smith" <st...@acm.org> ha scritto: > >> > >>> You might want to look at ssm-map-policy. > >>> > >>> http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/junos12.2/topics/topic-map/multicast-ssm-map-for-different-groups-to-different-sources.html > >>> > >>> I think it meets your needs, but depending on how dynamic your customer's > >>> requirements are, it may be cumbersome to maintain. > >>> > >>> Here's an example: > >>> > >>> [edit] > >>> user@host# show protocols igmp > >>> interface ge-0/0/0.0 { > >>> ssm-map-policy S1-only; > >>> } > >>> interface ge-0/0/1.0 { > >>> ssm-map-policy S1-and-S2; > >>> } > >>> interface ge-0/0/2.0 { > >>> ssm-map-policy S2-only; > >>> } > >>> > >>> [edit] > >>> user@host# show policy-options > >>> policy-statement S1-and-S2 { > >>> term 1 { > >>> from { > >>> route-filter 224.1.1.1/32 exact; > >>> } > >>> then { > >>> ssm-source [ 1.1.1.1 2.2.2.2 ]; > >>> accept; > >>> } > >>> } > >>> } > >>> policy-statement S1-only { > >>> term 1 { > >>> from { > >>> route-filter 224.1.1.1/32 exact; > >>> } > >>> then { > >>> ssm-source 1.1.1.1; > >>> accept; > >>> } > >>> } > >>> } > >>> policy-statement S2-only { > >>> from { > >>> route-filter 224.1.1.1/32 exact; > >>> } > >>> then { > >>> ssm-source 2.2.2.2; > >>> accept; > >>> } > >>> } > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Nov 22, 2012, at 9:54 AM, Riccardo S <dim0...@hotmail.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> no failover, are completely different data... > >>>> > >>>> Let's imagine we're talking of TV broadcasting and my customer wants > >>>> receive today only channel S1 but tomorrow also, maybe, channel S2... > >>>> > >>>> Ric > >>>> > >>>>> Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2012 17:51:07 +0100 > >>>>> From: ch...@chrishellberg.com > >>>>> To: dim0...@hotmail.com > >>>>> CC: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net > >>>>> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Same multicast group from the source > >>>>> > >>>>> It depends on what you want to do. Should the receiver receive both > >>>>> sources simultaneously and demultiplex the two? Or do you need failover > >>>>> of some kind? > >>>>> > >>>>> /Chris > >>>>> > >>>>> On 22/11/12 5:40 PM, Riccardo S wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Hi expert team, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I’ve a generic multicast question. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Let’s say I’ve two different source > >>>>>> sending different multicast traffic over the same multicast group, how > >>>>>> can I > >>>>>> solve the problem for a customer receiver ? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> S1=1.1.1.1 G1=224.1.1.1 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> S2=2.2.2.2 G2=224.1.1.1 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Customer receiver is usually running > >>>>>> IGMPv2 and I cannot force to use IGMPv3. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Network in the middle between source > >>>>>> and receiver is not MPLS. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I’ve thought to NAT multicast group, > >>>>>> but I’m not sure it works and if anyone has already implemented it… > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Any different solution is > >>>>>> appreciated… > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Tks > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Ric > >>>>>> > >>>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>>> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net > >>>>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net > >>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp