From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ia0-x232.google.com (mail-ia0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c02::232]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EF6C821F100 for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 10:16:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ia0-f178.google.com with SMTP id j38so1902069iad.9 for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 10:16:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=oDMPa4/eAcL61uI5RwQYQUBCM4fhcU0MHRjcV6sRxM4=; b=R9xX0O/V7zP9kQ7Ylu+SdIeydwTdgEi78YnArLt/eFDtb9d4YSJL3VXAJn2gZ+IUrh u5Yq9f7jxqrqs6czpzTAHoabToT6FwkS1FUubosbBOrUflZZve1rRX/YJT+B/UXRbETJ cNjxySfZGEhM0ZiApCGfeC8+ZCKJX/o+9TwZaXZBILz5PqVTxTdfTXVfXFidYum+ZeQp TJf94KAX9ERdogYQgpeCUz+pdh7zIaAKXMsauW+2GPkCj9xmmj49NYHqw5tB4hHaSLNA tMPVr/H6XHtTEKiFTs0WkAww/spPIUu//TgIo3xHZkhuAKLR0bkGFoD2Uot4S16G/KHR LK0Q== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.42.247.8 with SMTP id ma8mr19141889icb.1.1366823765311; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 10:16:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.64.132.71 with HTTP; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 10:16:05 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5177CACB.8050505@gmail.com> References: <98D3C55B-9D34-495C-AA82-CEDEE1882448@gmail.com> <5177CACB.8050505@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 10:16:05 -0700 Message-ID: From: Dave Taht To: William Katsak Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] Multicast X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 17:16:06 -0000 On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 5:06 AM, William Katsak wrote: > It seems that a lot of people are interested in IGMP proxying in order to > watch multicast IPTV streams from their ISP. > > In my case, I am using the router to run two subnets, one for actual stuf= f, > another for non-trusted people to use the Internet. > > I would like to be able to do Ghost imaging (Ghost is running in the prim= ary > subnet) of the machines in the non-trusted subnet, but it seems that the > multicast traffic isn't going through properly. I CAN do this within the > primary subnet. > > I got igmpproxy running and can see the route announcements in the log, b= ut > I assume I have it mis-configured. Maybe I will go back to pimd and play > with that. > > I guess if all else fails, I can always switch the VLAN of the port that > serves that segment when I want to do imagine and switch it back later :) > ... I just thought this might be a good opportunity to try and see if I c= an > get multicast to run properly. > > Thanks, > Bill The issues with multicast and firewalling are complex and legion. It does sound like a src or dst address 224 dot 0 dot 0 dot 0/4 subnet (the bufferbloat spam filter blocks numeric urls) needs to be explicitly allowed across the wan, guest and secure lans in cerowrt in order for this to work (on ipv4), and similar rules for ipv6 generated as well. I note that std openwrt doesn't do pim in the first place (thus the need for the igmp proxy) and enabling pimsm version 1 and 2 is one of the few remaining differences between cerowrt and openwrt, and it's obviously a not-so-well-tested area, generally! Is there a multicast IPTV server out there that could be used as a test base? vlc? I have long included uftp as a means of testing multicast but it would be better to test an actual IPTV application. While I'm talking about this, I note that I have given up on multicast rates for wifi of 1mbit in the campground testbed and default everything to 6mbit currently. Battlemesh used even higher values. It violates the spec for wifi but I figure I will make this change in a future release... > > P.S. This router is still running Sugarland...should that be an issue? > > > > On 04/24/2013 05:30 AM, Dave Taht wrote: >> >> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 12:25 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson >> wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, 23 Apr 2013, Dave Taht wrote: >>> >>>> pimd is included by default. >>> >>> >>> But does pimd really do IGMP-proxying? >> >> No, it does real IGMP. :) >> >> There may be some firewall issues with it. >> >>> I can't find any mention of IGMP >>> proxying in the pimd manual I found. ISPs generally do not allow >>> residential >>> customers to talk PIM with the network, they expect an IGMP join, which >>> is >>> what an IGMP proxy would do. >> >> Sample application? >>> >>> -- >>> Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list >>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net >>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel >> >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Cerowrt-devel mailing list > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel --=20 Dave T=E4ht Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt: http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.= html