Perhaps I wasn't clear. We are trying to decide right now whether the now split out TRILL IS-IS draft should have MGROUP in it, since MGROUP has been in isis-layer2 for some time, or we should drop MGROUP since some TRILL WG participants including Radia oppose MGROUP... do you have an opinion on this?
Thanks, Donald On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 2:16 PM, Rishi Srivatsavai <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello Donald, > > On 05/28/10 12:15, Donald Eastlake wrote: >> On a different topic, I would assume that the Oracle implementation >> does not use the proposed new MGROUP cluster of PDUs? > > Yes correct, our implementation hasn't been updated in support of > the latest layer-2 IS-IS draft. > >> I believe the Oracle implementation does not current support multicast >> optimization but note that, according to >> draft-ietf-isis-layer2-05.txt, the MGROUP PDU has not just multicast >> listeners in it but also the Interested VLANs and Spanning Tree Roots >> information which indicates the attached VLANs for the originating >> RBridge. So, at least according to that isis-layer2 draft, even if you >> don't implement multicast snooping or optimization, you would still >> have to implement MGROUP to announce VLAN connectivity... > > I will file an RFE to make this change in our implementation. > > [..] > > Thanks, > Rishi > _______________________________________________ rbridges-dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/rbridges-dev
