[Contents]
[Prev]
[Next]
[Index]
[Report an Error]
Multicast Routing Protocols
Multicast routing protocols enable a collection
of multicast routers to build (join) distribution trees when a host
on a directly attached subnet, typically a LAN, wants to receive traffic
from a certain multicast group.
There are five multicast routing protocols:
- DVMRP—The first of the
multicast routing protocols and hampered by a number of limitations
that make this method unattractive for large-scale Internet use. DVMRP
is a dense-mode-only protocol, and uses the flood-and-prune or implicit
join method to deliver traffic everywhere and then determine where
the uninterested receivers are. DVMRP uses source-based distribution
trees in the form (S,G).
- MOSPF—Extends
OSPF for multicast use, but only for dense mode. However, MOSPF has
an explicit join message, so routers do not have to flood their entire
domain with multicast traffic from every source. MOSPF uses source-based
distribution trees in the form (S,G).
- PIM dense mode—This is PIM operating in dense
mode (PIM DM), but the differences from PIM sparse mode are profound
enough to consider the two modes separately. PIM also supports sparse-dense
mode, with mixed sparse and dense groups, but there is no special
notation for that operational mode. In contrast to DVMRP and MOSPF,
PIM dense mode allows a router to use any unicast routing protocol
and performs RPF checks using the unicast routing table. PIM dense
mode has an implicit join message, so routers use the flood-and-prune
method to deliver traffic everywhere and then determine where the
uninterested receivers are. PIM dense mode uses source-based distribution
trees in the form (S,G), as do all dense-mode protocols.
- PIM sparse mode—Allows a router to use any unicast
routing protocol and performs RPF checks using the unicast routing
table. However, PIM sparse mode has an explicit join message, so routers determine where the interested receivers
are and send join messages upstream to their neighbors, building trees
from receivers to RP. PIM sparse mode uses an RP router as the initial
source of multicast group traffic and therefore builds distribution
trees in the form (*,G), as do all sparse-mode protocols. However,
PIM sparse mode migrates to an (S,G) source-based tree if that path
is shorter than through the RP for a particular multicast group's
traffic.
- Core Based
Trees (CBT)—Shares all of the characteristics of PIM sparse
mode (sparse mode, explicit join, and shared (*,G) trees), but is
said to be more efficient at finding sources than PIM sparse mode.
CBT is rarely encountered outside academic discussions. There are
no large-scale deployments of CBT, commercial or otherwise.
The differences among the five multicast routing
protocols are summarized in Table 7.
Table 7: Multicast
Routing Protocols Compared
|
Multicast Routing Protocol
|
Dense Mode
|
Sparse Mode
|
Implicit Join
|
Explicit Join
|
(S,G) SBT
|
(*,G) Shared Tree
|
|
DVMRP
|
Yes
|
No
|
Yes
|
No
|
Yes
|
No
|
|
MOSPF
|
Yes
|
No
|
No
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
No
|
|
PIM dense mode
|
Yes
|
No
|
Yes
|
No
|
Yes
|
No
|
|
PIM sparse mode
|
No
|
Yes
|
No
|
Yes
|
Yes, maybe
|
Yes, initially
|
|
CBT
|
No
|
Yes
|
No
|
Yes
|
No
|
Yes
|
It is important to realize that retransmissions
due to a high bit-error rate on a link or overloaded router can make
multicast as inefficient as repeated unicast. Therefore, there is
a trade-off in many multicast applications regarding the session support
provided by Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) (but TCP always resends
missing segments), or the simple drop-and-continue strategy of the
User Datagram Protocol (UDP) datagram service (but reordering can
become an issue). Modern multicast uses UDP almost exclusively.
[Contents]
[Prev]
[Next]
[Index]
[Report an Error]