[pim] Document Action: 'PIM Flooding Mechanism and Source Discovery Enhancements' to Experimental RFC (draft-ietf-pim-p fm-forwarding-enhancements-07.txt)

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'PIM Flooding Mechanism and Source Discovery Enhancements'
  (draft-ietf-pim-pfm-forwarding-enhancements-07.txt) as Experimental RFC

This document is the product of the Protocols for IP Multicast Working Group.

The IESG contact persons are Gunter Van de Velde, Jim Guichard and Ketan
Talaulikar.

A URL of this Internet-Draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pim-pfm-forwarding-enhancements/




Technical Summary

   The Protocol Independent Multicast (PIM) Flooding Mechanism (PFM)
   provides a generic hop-by-hop message exchange framework for
   distributing multicast information among PIM routers.  Existing PFM
   procedures enable efficient source discovery without reliance on
   Rendezvous Points, shared trees, or initial data registers.

   This document specifies enhancements to PFM forwarding behavior to
   improve efficiency and scalability.  In particular, it introduces
   mechanisms to reduce redundant message transmission over multiple
   parallel links and extends the encoding of multicast information
   through additional Type-Length-Value (TLV) structures and sub-TLVs to
   convey richer flow-related data.  These enhancements optimize
   control-plane overhead while preserving interoperability with
   existing PFM procedures, enabling more efficient dissemination of
   multicast state in PIM networks.

Working Group Summary

   Was there anything in the WG process that is worth noting?
   For example, was there controversy about particular points 
   or were there decisions where the consensus was
   particularly rough? 

No controversies. Good support from individuals across a variety of affiliations. No opposition.

Document Quality

   Are there existing implementations of the protocol?  Have a 
   significant number of vendors indicated their plan to
   implement the specification?  Are there any reviewers that
   merit special mention as having done a thorough review,
   e.g., one that resulted in important changes or a
   conclusion that the document had no substantive issues?  If
   there was a MIB Doctor, Media Type, or other Expert Review,
   what was its course (briefly)?  In the case of a Media Type
   Review, on what date was the request posted?

There is a prototype implementation by Cisco. It is not shipping code. It's
code to help validate that what is specified works well from implementation
point of view.

Personnel

   The Document Shepherd for this document is Mike McBride. The Responsible
   Area Director is Gunter Van de Velde.

_______________________________________________
pim mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]