All things related to multicast

[Magnus Danielson <>]

From: Bill Nickless 
<>
Subject: Re: MSDP Storm
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2001 18:11:05 -0600

> >BUT, it seems to me that at base this is not a MSDP issue - it is an IGMP
> >issue. Wouldn't it make more sense (although, alas, more work) to rate 
> >limit IGMP joins ?
> 
> Good question.
> 
> I agree with Dave Meyer's comment, that the general problem is a lack of 
> rate limiting on routing protocols subject to flooding, including 
> MSDP.  Should we include IGMP in this list of protocols that should be rate 
> limitable?  I'm not sure.

I think you really should do plumbing in both IGMP and MSDP in this case.
If the IGMP plumbing fail (intentionally or unintentionally disabled/broken)
on one box, then you need the plumbing in MSDP anyway. The MSDP saves your
network and whoever is behind that... IGMP plumbing is just the "first wave"
wall. If that falls, the network would fall, that's why MSDP also needs
attention.

Rate-limiting is just one of many tools.

This is really why there is a Security section in them RFCs. We really should
consider putting some standard plumbing in there...

Cheers,
Magnus