Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: IPTV and ASM
From: Keegan Holley <keegan.holley () sungard com>
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2011 01:02:04 +0100

Isn't source discovery and efficiency a big concern for ASM?  If individual
streams are tied to a specific source then it's possible to live without
some of the overhead involved in ASM.  Joins go straight to the source,
traffic is disseminated via direct paths instead of being replicated by the
RP, etc etc..

Disclaimer: Other than being a lab rat I haven't done much with multicast
in the wild.


2011/12/29 Jeff Tantsura <jeff.tantsura () ericsson com>

Mike,

To my knowledge in most today's networks even if legacy equipment don't
support IGMPv3 most likely 1st hop router does static translation and SSM
upstream.
The reason not to migrate to SSM is usually - ASM is already there and
works just fine :)
Cost to support RP infrastructure is usually the main non-technical factor
to not to use ASM.
Would be interested to hear from the SPs on the list.

Regards,
Jeff

On Dec 28, 2011, at 2:19 PM, "Mike McBride" <mmcbride7 () gmail com> wrote:

Marshall,

On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Marshall Eubanks
<marshall.eubanks () gmail com> wrote:
Dear Mike;

On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 4:48 PM, Mike McBride <mmcbride7 () gmail com>
wrote:
Anyone using ASM (versus SSM) for IPTV? If so why?


From what I understand, the answer is likely to be "yes" and the
reason is likely to be "deployed equipment only
supports IGMP v2."

Agreed. I'm seeking confirmation, from IPTV implementers, that non
igmpv3 support is the reason for using ASM with IPTV. Versus other
reasons such as reducing state. Or is this a non issue and everyone is
using SSM with IPTV?

thanks,
mike

Regards
Marshall

thanks,
mike







  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]
AlienVault