Subject: Re: windows / win95 / nt MBONE applications

From: Ross Finlayson <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 13:02:26 -0800 (PST)

>all the mbone tools for win95 / nt work only point to point 
>because the OS doesnt support multicast yet.
>
>true or false?

false

        Ross.

---

From: Jon Crowcroft <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 22:36:52 +0000

>>because the OS doesnt support multicast yet.

minimal mbone tunnel/stub routing for a windows 95/3 system would sure
be useful right now, specially with triggered update......to something
down the end of a dialup link....i know a lot of ISPs wnat something
like this....

j.

---

From: Petri Helenius <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 1996 00:53:27 +0200 (EET)

> down the end of a dialup link....i know a lot of ISPs wnat something
If you are using win95/win311 for connecting a LAN to the Internet and
providing routing between the two, you should really consider buying a
real router instead...

Pete

---

From: "Louis A. Mamakos" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 19:29:00 -0500

> down the end of a dialup link....i know a lot of ISPs wnat something

The Windows95 and WindowsNT stacks do support multicast, they just
don't act as multicast routers.  We recently did a demo with Microsoft
where a pile of Windows 95 hosts dialed into multicast-enabled dial
access servers and subscribed to a multicast group and listed to an
audio presentation.  It worked pretty darn well, and there was no
DVMRP or associated pre-configured tunnels for end users in the
picture.  Which is good, be cause there were likely on the order of
1000 participants and that's only expected to grow.

My personal opinion is that expecting the tunnel paradigm to scale to
accomodate a large number of end-users is expecting way too much.
Especially the dial-up end-user workstation type user.  And that's not
even assuming that all these end-users would manage to get a tunnel
configured correctly..

Louis A. Mamakos,  Manager, Strategic Technologies  [email-masked],  uunet!louie
UUNET Technologies, Inc.                            Voice: +1 703 206 5823
3060 Williams Drive                                 Fax:   +1 703 208 5390
Fairfax, VA 22031

---

From: Kim YoungSik <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 1996 10:54:47 +0000 (KST)

> 1000 participants and that's only expected to grow.

Could you tell me more about the multicast-enabled dial access servers?
I need the name of vander, product name or number, and etc.

Thanks in advance..
-- 

    _/    _/  _/_/_/  _/    _ _/ _/     _/ _/_/_/_/     Kim, YoungSik
   _/   _/     _/    _/_/ _/ _/  _/    _/ _/      
  _/_/_/      _/    _/  _/  _/    _/  _/ _/_/_/_/       HANSOL Telecom 
 _/   _/     _/    _/      _/      _/_/       _/   Internet Engineering Team 
_/     _/ _/_/_/  _/      _/        _/ _/_/_/_/ 
                                   _/           E-mail: [email-masked]
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/            Voice : +82-2-3457-5162
                                                http://h2o.hansol.co.kr/~kimys

---

From: Jon Crowcroft <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 1996 08:38:50 +0000

>1000 participants and that's only expected to grow.

yes, i understand this model of use.....

how did the multicast dial enabled access servers work exactly?

 >even assuming that all these end-users would manage to get a tunnel

i agree - the scenerio we have is very small numbers (10) of leaf machines
in a large numnber of schools  (10,000)....

if the IGMP group stuff propogates to the remote server ok, this is
reasonable, but we'd perfer to have a school server/router that runs a
triv. mrouted over the dialup link, with triggered
routing/pruning......based on line state.....

we wrote this up some time ago, and i can send if you like...

we CANNOT afford even 1 extra machine....the UK schools budget won't
justify it....but to turn a win3 or win95 server into a tribv. mrouted
would be ideal....

we cannot afford to add modems to every machine in the school (just
check out the UK stupid  line rentals for example...)

so anyone got a solution (it isn't rocket science hard, except for microsoft OS
problems of having the hooks.....)

 jon

---

From: Petri Helenius <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 1996 10:46:38 +0200 (EET)

> problems of having the hooks.....)
Running flood and prune based protocols over dialup links does not
sound feasible to any extent. Specially when the current
implementation does not re-transmit prunes in case of frame loss.

Pete

---

From: "Mark A. Fullmer" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 1996 13:18:31 -0500 (EST)

>how did the multicast dial enabled access servers work exactly?

int async1
 ip pim sparse mode

int async2
 ip pim sparse mode

...

I wish there was a way to disable PIM, and only do IGMP on interfaces
though.

-- 
mark

---

From: Dino Farinacci <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 1996 14:23:16 -0800

>> I wish there was a way to disable PIM, and only do IGMP on interfaces

    There is by just joining a group via the "ip igmp join-group <group>"
    command. However, we don't multicast forward on the interface. 

    What is the harm running PIM on an async interface that connects to
    a host. There are 30-second periodic Querys sent but that is pretty
    negligible.

Dino

---

From: Petri Helenius <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 13:50:30 +0200 (EET)

> I wish there was a way to disable PIM, and only do IGMP on interfaces
That would be useful on the dialups, etc.

Pete

---

From: Petri Helenius <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 14:18:57 +0200 (EET)

>     a host. There are 30-second periodic Querys sent but that is pretty
Maybe it just "feels better" not to be able to form a routing
adjacency over a dialup link...

Pete

---

From: "Mark A. Fullmer" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 1996 22:32:32 -0500 (EST)

>    a host. There are 30-second periodic Querys sent but that is pretty

Previous experience with unicast routing protocols like RIP suggest there
will soon be a time when boxes on our LANs or serial interfaces will have
end users trying to configure routing daemons where they don't belong.

At least for now, I'd like to know where our PIM cloud extends to, 
what versions of IOS are involved, etc by manually configuring PIM
or DVMRP where it's needed and just IGMP everywhere else.

-- 
mark