[147965] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPTV and ASM
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jeff Tantsura)
Wed Dec 28 18:33:32 2011
From: Jeff Tantsura <jeff.tantsura@ericsson.com>
To: Mike McBride <mmcbride7@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2011 18:32:38 -0500
In-Reply-To: <CAL3FGfw2cic6tw8V0BC5QtWGW_oPryFsc5OGHrgdYkT9W-E3Sw@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Mike,
To my knowledge in most today's networks even if legacy equipment don't sup=
port IGMPv3 most likely 1st hop router does static translation and SSM upst=
ream.
The reason not to migrate to SSM is usually - ASM is already there and work=
s 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,
>=20
> On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Marshall Eubanks
> <marshall.eubanks@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Dear Mike;
>>=20
>> On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 4:48 PM, Mike McBride <mmcbride7@gmail.com> wrot=
e:
>>> Anyone using ASM (versus SSM) for IPTV? If so why?
>>>=20
>>=20
>> From what I understand, the answer is likely to be "yes" and the
>> reason is likely to be "deployed equipment only
>> supports IGMP v2."
>=20
> 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?
>=20
> thanks,
> mike
>=20
>> Regards
>> Marshall
>>=20
>>> thanks,
>>> mike
>>>=20
>=20
