From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 2 20:19:14 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: net@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2E2D16A403 for ; Fri, 2 Feb 2007 20:19:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bms@incunabulum.net) Received: from out5.smtp.messagingengine.com (out5.smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD72C13C491 for ; Fri, 2 Feb 2007 20:19:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bms@incunabulum.net) Received: from out1.internal (unknown [10.202.2.149]) by out1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50D459DD4D for ; Fri, 2 Feb 2007 15:19:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from heartbeat1.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.160]) by out1.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 02 Feb 2007 15:19:13 -0500 X-Sasl-enc: +2QiA+MEPj+9l8c7XvK0jFFtW/AsozzZd7DVlC5PFmes 1170447553 Received: from [192.168.123.18] (82-35-112-254.cable.ubr07.dals.blueyonder.co.uk [82.35.112.254]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDF3E1B074 for ; Fri, 2 Feb 2007 15:19:12 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <45C39CBF.7010105@incunabulum.net> Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 20:19:11 +0000 From: Bruce M Simpson User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (X11/20070125) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: net@FreeBSD.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Subject: Proposal: remove encap from MROUTING X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 20:19:15 -0000 How would you all feel about removing the old encapsulation methods from IPv4 multicast routing as OpenBSD has done? http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/sys/netinet/ip_mroute.c.diff?r1=1.42&r2=1.43 The last time I deployed any such infrastructure, I had to use gif(4); in a NATted world, the encap stuff has never worked cleanly for me or been worth the additional effort in deployment. Regards, BMS