<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 2/19/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Pavlin Radoslavov</b> <<a href="mailto:pavlin@icir.org">pavlin@icir.org</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
> As per your reply regarding setting the bidir-bit so as to differentiate<br>> between the PIM-SM and PIM-Bidir (*,G) entries ,we are not very clear about<br>> how the (*,G) entries are stored in PIM_SM as per your implementation.(We
<br>> tried searching for those in PIM_MRE.hh ,PIM.h,IPv4.h.)So we are unable to<br>> decide the setting of the Bidir-bit for (*,G) entries.<br>><br>> Can we use a flag along with the (*,G) entries and store both of them
<br>> together in the templates????<br><br>The PimMre class is defined in pim_mre.hh. This class is used for<br>any type of multicast routing entries, so you have to add the<br>bidir flag to that class.<br><br></blockquote>
</div><br><div><br>
Till now we have enabled enable_pim_bidir flag by using
config file (<a href="http://pim.tp">pim.tp</a>) & now we are able to use this flag to check
is_pim_bidir_enable in PimNode.cc. Also we have managed to add
PIM_BIDIR_CAPABLE flag in pim_proto_hello.cc !!!!<br>
</div> Sir we are thinking of using the same
flag(is_pim_bidir_enable) to maintain the (*,G) entries in PIM-MRE
class.If this flag is enabled then we are going to consider every (*,G)
entry for pim-bidir. Please validate us!!<br>
<br>
Thanking you in anticipation <br> -Shamita<br>
-Ashish<br>
-chintamani