[147986] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPTV and ASM
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mark Tinka)
Thu Dec 29 04:15:01 2011
From: Mark Tinka <mtinka@globaltransit.net>
To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2011 17:13:19 +0800
In-Reply-To: <CAJNg7VJNRA2Q-q+yqq4zKsNi2f5ro=5CXEDdg6VWkqXTsVD2UA@mail.gmail.com>
Reply-To: mtinka@globaltransit.net
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
--nextPart1440301.N8Hl6aMxSR
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Thursday, December 29, 2011 05:50:58 AM Marshall Eubanks=20
wrote:
> >From what I understand, the answer is likely to be "yes"
> >and the
>=20
> reason is likely to be "deployed equipment only
> supports IGMP v2."
This is true for us - the broadcaster whose IPTv traffic we=20
carry supports only IGMPv2. This makes SSM a no-no, but we=20
aren't really complaining about having to use PIM-SM either.
Mark.
--nextPart1440301.N8Hl6aMxSR
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux)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=TSsH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--nextPart1440301.N8Hl6aMxSR--
