Mldv2 router conformance test (tahi)

Balaji Sankaran <[email protected]> Thu, 24 Jun 2010 11:13:38 +0530
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.magma
Message-ID <[email protected]>
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--===============2085174402==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="------------010400070200010606080302"

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------010400070200010606080302
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello,

Note: This is not Mldv2 protocol related query and it is related to tahi 
router
conformance test case on Mldv2 snooping devices. I have send this query to
tahi users mailing list to get their suggestion. Posting this here to 
get the
view of implementers on this test case.



I need some clarifications on an MLDv2 router conformance test case and how
the configuration on the switch should be to pass this test case.

Test case I am referring can be found in the below link
http://cert.v6pc.jp/mldv2/doc/mldv2-router-1.0.4/mldv2-router_2in1/mldv2-router_1_8.html

The above test case tests the following section of RFC 3810:-

<rfc 3810 >

 From RFC 3810 section 7 it states:

....

A multicast router performs the protocol described in this section

over each of its directly attached links. If a multicast router has

more than one interface to the same link, it only needs to operate

this protocol over one of those interfaces.

For each interface over which the router operates the MLD protocol,

the router must configure that interface to listen to all link-layer

multicast addresses that can be generated by IPv6 multicasts.
</rfc 3810>

I am trying to figure out how the configuration on the switch
or router would  look like to perform this test.

There are switches which acts as MLD snooping querier and in these
MLD is enabled and disabled on Vlan basis.   To test the MLDv2
conformance test cases on these switches,  we can consider vlan interface as
an router interface and I think all the test cases can be run (except 
MLD.1.8
test case) on a Mld Enabled vlan interface. However the test case MLD.1.8,
seems to be invalid on these devices.

Whether anybody tried  this test case on a MLD snooping device/switches and
routers and share their thoughts/experience. It will be of great help.

Please let me know if  I need to add any further information.

regards,
Balaji

--------------010400070200010606080302
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>

<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Hello,<br>
<br>
Note: This is not Mldv2 protocol related query and it is related to
tahi router<br>
conformance test case on Mldv2 snooping devices. I have send this query
to<br>
tahi users mailing list to get their suggestion. Posting this here to
get the<br>
view of implementers on this test case.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
I need some clarifications on an MLDv2 router conformance test case and
how<br>
the configuration on the switch should be to pass this test case.<br>
<br>
Test case I am referring can be found in the below link<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
 href="http://cert.v6pc.jp/mldv2/doc/mldv2-router-1.0.4/mldv2-router_2in1/mldv2-router_1_8.html">http://cert.v6pc.jp/mldv2/doc/mldv2-router-1.0.4/mldv2-router_2in1/mldv2-router_1_8.html</a><br>
<br>
The above test case tests the following section of RFC 3810:-<br>
<br>
&lt;rfc 3810 &gt;<br>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">From RFC
3810 section 7 it
states:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>....<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">A multicast
router performs the
protocol described in this section<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">over each
of its directly
attached links. If a multicast router has<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">more than
one interface to the
same link, it only needs to operate<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">this
protocol over one of those
interfaces.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">For each
interface over which
the router operates the MLD protocol,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">the router
must configure that
interface to listen to all link-layer<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">multicast addresses that can be
generated by IPv6 multicasts.</span><br>
&lt;/rfc 3810&gt;<br>
<br>
I am trying to figure out how the configuration on the switch<br>
or router would&nbsp; look like to perform this test.<br>
<br>
There are switches which acts as MLD snooping querier and in these<br>
MLD is enabled and disabled on Vlan basis.&nbsp;&nbsp; To test the MLDv2<br>
conformance test cases on these switches,&nbsp; we can consider vlan
interface as<br>
an router interface and I think all the test cases can be run (except
MLD.1.8<br>
test case) on a Mld Enabled vlan interface. However the test case
MLD.1.8,<br>
seems to be invalid on these devices.<br>
<br>
Whether anybody tried&nbsp; this test case on a MLD snooping device/switches
and<br>
routers and share their thoughts/experience. It will be of great help.<br>
<br>
Please let me know if&nbsp; I need to add any further information.<br>
<br>
regards,<br>
Balaji
</body>
</html>

--------------010400070200010606080302--

--===============2085174402==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
magma mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/magma

--===============2085174402==--