INTERNET-DRAFT          Source-Specific Multicast            H. Holbrook
Expires May 3, 2003                                        Cisco Systems
                                                                 B. Cain
                                                         Cereva Networks
                                                              3 Nov 2002

                    Source-Specific Multicast for IP

Status of this Memo

This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with all
provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.

Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task
Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that other groups
may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts.

Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet- Drafts as reference material
or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at

The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at

The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC 2119].

Holbrook/Cain                                                   [Page 1]

INTERNET-DRAFT          Source-Specific Multicast             3 Nov 2002


IP addresses in the 232/8 ( to range are
designated as source-specific multicast (SSM) destination addresses and
are reserved for use by source-specific applications and protocols
[IANA-ALLOCATION].  For IP version 6 (IPv6), the address prefix
FF3x::/32 is reserved for Source-Specific Multicast use, where 'x' is
any valid scope identifier [IPV6-UBM].  This document defines the
semantics of source-specific multicast addresses and specifies the
policies governing their use.  It defines an extension to the Internet
network service that applies to datagrams sent to SSM addresses and
defines the host and router requirements to support this extension.

A companion document will describe how the Internet Group Management
Protocol Version 3 [IGMPv3] and the Multicast Listener Discovery
Protocol Version 2 [MLDv2] are adapted to support source-specific

1.  Overview and Rationale

The Internet Protocol (IP) multicast service model is defined in RFC
1112 [RFC1112].  RFC 1112 specifies that a datagram sent to an IP
multicast address ( through G is delivered to
each "upper-layer protocol module" that has requested reception of
datagrams sent to address G.  RFC 1112 calls the network service
identified by a multicast destination address G a "host group."  This
model supports both one-to-many and many-to-many group communication.
This document uses the term "Any-Source Multicast" (ASM) to refer to the
RFC 1112 model of multicast.  RFC 2373 [RFC2373] specifies the form of
IPv6 multicast addresses with ASM semantics.

IP addresses in the 232/8 ( to range are
currently designated as source-specific multicast (SSM) destination
addresses and are reserved for use by source-specific applications and
protocols [IANA-ALLOCATION].

For IPv6, the address prefix FF3x::/32 is reserved for Source-Specific
Multicast use, where 'x' is any valid scope identifier [IPV6-UBM].
Addresses in the range FF3x::4000:0000 through FF3x::7fff:ffff are
reserved for allocation by IANA, and addresses in the range
FF3x::8000:0000 through FF3x::ffff:ffff are allowed for dynamic
allocation by a host, as described in [IPV6-MALLOC].  Addresses in the
range FF3x::0000:0000 through FF3x::3fff:ffff are invalid IPv6 SSM
addresses, per [IPV6-UBM].  The treatment of a packet sent to such an
invalid address is undefined -- a router or host MAY choose to drop such
a packet.

Holbrook/Cain                                                   [Page 2]

INTERNET-DRAFT          Source-Specific Multicast             3 Nov 2002

Source-Specific Multicast delivery semantics are provided for a datagram
sent to an SSM address.  That is, a datagram with source IP address S
and SSM destination address G is delivered to each upper-layer "socket"
that has specifically requested the reception of datagrams sent to
address G by source S, and only to those sockets.  The network service
identified by (S,G), for SSM address G and source host address S, is
referred to as a "channel."  In contrast to the ASM model of RFC 1112,
SSM provides network-layer support for one-to-many delivery only.

The benefits of source-specific multicast include:

    Elimination of cross-delivery of traffic when two sources
    simultaneously use the same source-specific destination address.
    The simultaneous use of an SSM destination address by multiple
    sources and different applications is explicitly supported.

    Avoidance of the need for inter-host coordination when choosing
    source-specific addresses, as a consequence of the above.

    Avoidance of many of the router protocols and algorithms that are
    needed to provide the ASM service model.  For instance, the "shared
    trees" and Rendezvous Points of the PIM-Sparse Mode (PIM-SM)
    protocol are not necessary to support the source-specific model.
    The router mechanisms required to support SSM are in fact largely a
    subset of those that are used to support ASM.  For example, the
    shortest-path tree mechanism of the PIM-SM protocol can be adapted
    to provide SSM semantics.

Like ASM, the set of receivers is unknown to an SSM sender.  An SSM
source is provided with neither the identity of receivers nor their

This document defines the semantics of source-specific multicast
addresses and specifies the policies governing their use.  In
particular, it defines an extension to the Internet network service that
applies to datagrams sent to SSM addresses and defines host extensions
to support the network service.  Hosts, routers, applications, and
protocols that use these addresses MUST comply with the policies
outlined in this document.  Failure of a host to comply may prevent that
host or other hosts on the same LAN from receiving traffic sent to an
SSM channel.  Failure of a router to comply may cause SSM traffic to be
delivered to parts of the network where it is unwanted, unnecessarily
burdening the network.

2.  Semantics of Source-Specific Multicast Addresses

The source-specific multicast service is defined as follows:

Holbrook/Cain                                                   [Page 3]

INTERNET-DRAFT          Source-Specific Multicast             3 Nov 2002

    A datagram sent with source IP address S and destination IP address
    G in the SSM range is delivered to each host socket that has
    specifically requested delivery of datagrams sent by S to G, and
    only to those sockets.

Where, using the terminology of [IGMPv3],

    "socket" is an implementation-specific parameter used to distinguish
    among different requesting entities (e.g., programs or processes or
    communication end-points within a program or process) within the
    requesting host; the socket parameter of BSD Unix system calls is a
    specific example.

Any host may send a datagram to any SSM address, and delivery is
provided according to the above semantics.

The IP module interface to upper-layer protocols is extended to allow a
socket to "Subscribe" to or "Unsubscribe" from a particular channel
identified by an SSM destination address and a source IP address.  The
extended interface is defined in section 4.1.  It is meaningless for an
application or host to request reception of datagrams sent to an SSM
destination address G, as is supported in the Any-Source Multicast model
without also specifying a corresponding source address, and routers MUST
ignore any such request from a host.

Multiple source applications on different hosts can use the same SSM
destination address G without conflict because datagrams sent by each
source host Si are delivered only to those sockets that requested
delivery of datagrams sent to G specifically by Si.

The key distinguishing property of the model is that a channel is
identified (addressed) by the combination of a unicast source address
and a multicast destination address in the SSM range.  So, for example,
the channel

    S,G = (,

differs from

    S,G = (,,

even though they have the same destination address portion.  Similarly,
for IPv6,

   S,G = (2001:3618::1, FF23::1234)


Holbrook/Cain                                                   [Page 4]

INTERNET-DRAFT          Source-Specific Multicast             3 Nov 2002

   S,G = (2001:3618::2, FF23::1234)

are different channels.

3.  Terminology

To avoid confusion when talking about the Any-Source and Source-Specific
Multicast models, we use different terminology when discussing them.

We use the term "channel" to refer to the service associated with an SSM
address.  A channel is identified by the combination of an SSM
destination address and a specific source, e.g., an (S,G) pair.

We use the term "host group" (used in RFC 1112) to refer to the service
associated with "regular" ASM multicast addresses (excluding those in
the SSM range).  A host group is identified by a single multicast

Any host can send to a host group, and similarly, any host can send to
an SSM destination address.  A packet sent by a host S to an ASM
destination address G is delivered to the host group identified by G.  A
packet sent by host S to an SSM destination address G is delivered to
the channel identified by (S,G).  The receiver operations allowed on a
host group are called "join(G)" and "leave(G)" (as per RFC 1112).  The
receiver operations allowed on a channel are called "Subscribe(S,G)" and

The following table summarizes the terminology:

  Service Model:        Any-Source          Source-Specific
  Network Abstraction:  group               channel
  Identifier:           G                   S,G
  Receiver Operations:  join, leave         subscribe, unsubscribe

We note that, although this document specifies a new service model
available to applications, the protocols and techniques necessary to
support the service model are largely a subset of those used to support

4.  Host Requirements

This section describes requirements on hosts that support Source-
Specific Multicast, including:

  - Extensions to the IP Module Interface

  - Extensions to the IP Module

Holbrook/Cain                                                   [Page 5]

INTERNET-DRAFT          Source-Specific Multicast             3 Nov 2002

  - Allocation of SSM Addresses

4.1.  Extensions to the IP Module Interface

The IP module interface to upper-layer protocols is extended to allow
protocols to request reception of all datagrams sent to a particular

    Subscribe ( socket, source-address, group-address, interface )

    Unsubscribe ( socket, source-address, group-address, interface )


    "socket" is as previously defined in Section 2,

and, paraphrasing [IGMPv3],

    "interface" is a local identifier of the network interface on which
    reception of the channel identified by the (source-address,group-
    address) pair is to be enabled or disabled.  A special value may be
    used to indicate a "default" interface.  If reception of the same
    channel is desired on multiple interfaces, Subscribe is invoked once
    for each.

The above are strictly abstract functional interfaces -- the
functionality can be provided in an implementation-specific way.  On a
host that supports the multicast source filtering application
programming interface of [MSFAPI], the Subscribe and Unsubscribe
interfaces may be supported via that API.

Widespread implementations of the IP packet reception interface (e.g.,
the recvfrom() system call in BSD unix) do not allow a receiver to
determine the destination address to which a datagram was sent.  On a
host with such an implementation, the destination address of a datagram
cannot be inferred when the socket on which the datagram is received is
Subscribed to multiple channels.  Host operating systems SHOULD provide
a way for a host to determine both the source and the destination
address to which a datagram was sent.  (As one example, the Linux
operating system provides the destination of a packet as part of the
response to the recvmsg() system call.)  Until this capability is
present, applications may be forced to use higher-layer mechanisms to
identify the channel to which a datagram was sent.

Holbrook/Cain                                                   [Page 6]

INTERNET-DRAFT          Source-Specific Multicast             3 Nov 2002

4.2.  Requirements on the Host IP Module

An incoming datagram destined to an SSM address MUST be delivered by the
IP module to all sockets that have indicated (via Subscribe) a desire to
receive data that matches the datagram's source address, destination
address, and arriving interface.  It MUST NOT be delivered to other

When the first socket on host H subscribes to a channel (S,G) on
interface I, the host IP module on H sends a request on interface I to
indicate to neighboring routers that the host wishes to receive traffic
sent by source S to source-specific destination G.  Similarly, when the
last socket on a host unsubscribes from a channel on interface I, the
host IP module sends an unsubscription request for that channel out
interface I.

These requests will typically be IGMPv3 messages for IPv4, or MLDv2
messages for IPv6.  The exact rules for sending source-specific
subscription and unsubscription requests and the algorithms used to
maintain subscriptions are defined in other documents.

4.3.  Allocation of Source-Specific Multicast Addresses

The SSM destination address is reserved, and hosts MUST NOT
send datagrams with destination address of  The address range is currently reserved for allocation by IANA.  The
IPv6 SSM address range FF2x:: is reserved for IANA allocation.

The policy for allocating the rest of the SSM addresses to sending
applications is strictly locally determined by the sending host.

When allocating SSM addresses dynamically, a host or host operating
system MUST NOT allocate sequentially starting at the first allowed
address.  It is RECOMMENDED to allocate SSM addresses to applications
randomly, while ensuring that allocated addresses are not given
simultaneously to multiple applications (and avoiding the reserved
address range for IPv4).  For IPv6, the randomization should apply to
the lower 32 bits of the address.

As described in Section 6, the mapping of an IP packet with SSM
destination address onto a link-layer multicast address does not take
into account the datagram's source IP address (on commonly-used link
layers like Ethernet).  If all hosts started at the first allowed
address, then with high probability, many source-specific channels on
shared-medium local area networks would collide on the same link-layer
multicast address.  As a result, traffic destined for one channel
subscriber would be delivered to another's IP module, which would then

Holbrook/Cain                                                   [Page 7]

INTERNET-DRAFT          Source-Specific Multicast             3 Nov 2002

have to reject the datagram.

A host operating system SHOULD provide an interface to allow an
application to request a unique allocation of a channel destination
address in advance of a session's commencement, and this allocation
database SHOULD persist across host reboots.  By providing persistent
allocations, a host application can advertise the session in advance of
its start time on a web page or in another directory.  (We note that
this issue is not specific to SSM applications -- the same problem
arises for ASM.)

This document neither defines the interfaces for requesting or returning
addresses nor specifies the host algorithms for storing those
allocations.  One plausible abstract API is defined in RFC 2771
[RFC2771].  Note that RFC 2771 allows an application to request an
address within a specific range of addresses.  If this interface is
used, the starting address of the range SHOULD be selected at random.

No globally agreed-upon administratively-scoped address range [ADMIN-
SCOPE] is currently defined for source-specific multicast.  Note that
there is no possibility of address conflict between hosts in different
administrative domains (or between two hosts of any kind).
Administrative scoping of SSM addresses can be implemented within an
administrative domain by filtering at domain boundary routers.

5.  Router Requirements

5.1.  Packet Forwarding

A router that receives an IP datagram with a source-specific destination
address MUST silently drop it unless a neighboring host or router has
communicated a desire to receive packets sent from the source and to the
destination address of the received packet.

5.2.  Protocols

Certain IP multicast routing protocols already have the ability to
communicate source-specific joins to neighboring routers (in particular,
PIM-SM), and these protocols can, with slight modifications, be used to
provide source-specific semantics.  Companion documents will specify the
required  modifications to those protocols to support the source-
specific address range.

A network can concurrently support SSM semantics in the SSM address
range and Any-Source Multicast in the rest of the multicast address

Holbrook/Cain                                                   [Page 8]

INTERNET-DRAFT          Source-Specific Multicast             3 Nov 2002

space, and it is expected that this will be commonplace.  In such a
network, a router may receive a non-source-specific, or "(*,G)" in
conventional terminology, request for delivery of traffic in the SSM
range from a neighbor that does not implement source-specific multicast
in a manner compliant with this document.  A router that receives such a
non-source-specific request for data in the SSM range MUST NOT use the
request to establish forwarding state and MUST NOT propagate the request
to other neighboring routers.  This applies both to any request received
from a host, e.g., an IGMPv1 or IGMPv2 host report, and to any request
received from a routing protocol, e.g., a PIM-SM (*,G) join [PIM-SM].
The inter-router case is further discussed in section 8, Transition

It is essential that all routers in the network give source-specific
semantics to the same range of addresses in order to achieve the full
benefit of SSM.  To comply with this specification, a router MUST treat
ALL SSM addresses with source-specific semantics.

6.  Link-Layer Transmission of Datagrams

Source-specific multicast packets are transmitted on link-layer networks
as specified in RFC 1112 for IPv4 and as in [ETHERv6] for IPv6.  On most
shared-medium link-layer networks that support multicast (e.g.,
Ethernet), the IP source address is not used in the selection of the
link-layer destination address.  Consequently, on such a network, all
packets sent to destination address G will be delivered to any host that
has subscribed to any channel (S,G), regardless of S.  And therefore,
the IP module MUST filter packets it receives from the link layer before
delivering them to the socket layer.  A socket on which an (S,G)
subscription has been requested MUST NOT receive packets whose source
and destination address do not match the requested subscription(s) for
that socket.

7.  Security Considerations

7.1.  Denial-of-Service

A subscription request creates (S,G) state in a router to record the
subscription and invokes processing on that router and possibly causes
processing at neighboring routers.  A host can mount a denial of service
attack by requesting a large number of subscriptions.  A denial of
service can result if:

Holbrook/Cain                                                   [Page 9]

INTERNET-DRAFT          Source-Specific Multicast             3 Nov 2002

    - a large amount of traffic arrives when it was otherwise undesired,
    consuming network resources to deliver it and host resources to drop

    - a large amount of source-specific multicast state is created in
    network routers, using router memory and CPU resources to store and
    process the state

    - a large amount of control traffic is generated to manage the
    source-specific state, using router CPU and network bandwidth

To reduce the damage from such an attack, a router MAY have a
configuration option to limit the following items:

    - The total rate at which all hosts on any one interface are allowed
    to initiate subscriptions (to limit the damage caused by forged
    source-address attacks)

    - The total number of subscriptions that can be initated from any
    single interface or host.

Any decision by an implementor to artificially limit the rate or number
of subscriptions should be taken carefully, however, as future
applications may use large numbers of channels.  Tight limits on the
rate or number of channel subscriptions would inhibit the deployment of
such applications.

A router SHOULD verify that the source of a subscription request is a
valid address for the interface on which it was received.  Failure to do
so would exacerbate a spoofed-source address attack.

We note that these attacks are not unique to SSM -- they are also
present for Any-Source Multicast.

7.2.  Spoofed Source Addresses

By forging the source address in a datagram, an attacker can potentially
violate the SSM service model by transmitting datagrams on a channel
belonging to another host.  Thus, an application requiring strong
authentication should not assume that all packets that arrive on a
channel were sent by the requested source without higher-layer
authentication mechanisms.  The IPSEC Authentication Header [IPSEC] may
be used to authenticate the source of an SSM transmission, for instance.

Some degree of protection against spoofed source addresses in multicast
is already fairly widespread, because the commonly deployed IP multicast
routing protocols [PIM-DM, PIM-SM, DVMRP] incorporate a "reverse-path

Holbrook/Cain                                                  [Page 10]

INTERNET-DRAFT          Source-Specific Multicast             3 Nov 2002

forwarding check" that validates that a multicast packet arrived on the
expected interface for its source address.  Routing protocols used for
SSM SHOULD incorporate such a check.

Source Routing [RFC791] (both Loose and Strict) in combination with
source address spoofing may be used to allow an impostor of the true
channel source to inject packets onto an SSM channel.  An SSM router
MUST have a configuration option to disable source routing to an SSM
destination addresses, and the default value SHOULD be to disable Source
Routing to an SSM destination address.  Anti-source spoofing mechanisms
like source address filtering at the edges of the network are also
strongly encouraged.

8.  Transition Considerations

A host that complies with this document will send ONLY source-specific
host reports for addresses in the SSM range.  A router that receives a
non-source-specific (IGMPv1 or IGMPv2) host report for a source-specific
destination addresses SHOULD ignore these reports.  Failure to do so
would violate the SSM service model promised to the sender: that a
packet sent to (S,G) would only be delivered to hosts that specifically
requested delivery of packets sent to G by S.

During a transition period, it would be possible to deliver SSM
datagrams in a domain where the routers do not support SSM semantics by
simply forwarding any packet destined to G to all hosts that have
requested subscription of (S,G) for any S.  However, this implementation
risks unduly burdening the network infrastructure by deliver (S,G)
datagrams to hosts that did not request them.  Such an implementation
for addresses in the SSM range is specifically not compliant with
Section 5.2 of this document.

9.  IANA Considerations

Addresses in the range through and IPv6 addresses
with prefix FF2x:: are reserved for services with wide applicability
that either require or would strongly benefit if all hosts used a well-
known SSM destination address for that service.  IANA shall allocate
addresses in this range according to IETF Consensus [IANA-
CONSIDERATIONS].  Any proposal for allocation must consider the fact
that, on an Ethernet network, all datagrams sent to any SSM destination
address will be transmitted with the same link-layer destination
address, regardless of the source.  Furthermore, the fact that SSM
destinations in and use the same link-layer
addresses as the reserved IP multicast group range must
also be considered.  Similar consideration should be given to the IPv6

Holbrook/Cain                                                  [Page 11]

INTERNET-DRAFT          Source-Specific Multicast             3 Nov 2002

reserved multicast addresses.

Except for the aforementioned addresses, IANA SHALL NOT allocate any SSM
destination address to a particular entity or application.  To do so
would compromise one of the important benefits of the source-specific
model: the ability for a host to simply and autonomously allocate a
source-specific address from a large flat address space.

10.  Acknowledgments

The SSM service model draws on a variety of prior work on alternative
aproaches to IP multicast, including the EXPRESS multicast model of
Holbrook and Cheriton [EXPRESS], Green's [SMRP] and the Simple Multicast
proposal of Perlman et. al. [SIMPLE].  We would also like to thank Jon
Postel and David Cheriton for their support in reassigning the 232/8
address range to SSM.  Brian Haberman contributed to the IPv6 portion of
this document.

11.  References

11.1.  Normative

[RFC791] Postel, J., ed., "Internet Protocol, Darpa Internet Program
Protocol Specification," September 1981.

[IPV6-UBM] B. Haberman, D. Thaler, "Unicast-Prefix-based IPv6 Multicast
Addresses.", RFC 3306, August 2002.

[IPV6-MALLOC] B. Haberman, "Dynamic Allocation Guidelines for IPv6
Multicast Addresses", RFC 3307, August 2002.

[ETHERv6]   Crawford, M., "Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Ethernet
Networks", RFC2464, Dec 1998.

[RFC1112] Deering, S., "Host Extensions for IP Multicasting," RFC 1112,
August 1989.

[RFC2373] Hinden, R. and Deering, S.  "IP Version 6 Addressing
Architecture."  RFC 2373, July 1998.

11.2.  Non-normative

[ADMIN-SCOPE] Meyer, D., "Administratively Scoped IP Multicast", BCP 23,
RFC 2365, July 1998.

[DVMRP] Waitzman, D., Partridge, C., and S. Deering., "Distance Vector
Multicast Routing Protocol," RFC 1075, Nov 1988.

Holbrook/Cain                                                  [Page 12]

INTERNET-DRAFT          Source-Specific Multicast             3 Nov 2002

[EXPRESS] Holbrook, H., and Cheriton, D.  "Explicitly Requested Source-
Specific  Multicast: EXPRESS support for Large-scale Single-source
Applications."  Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM '99, Cambridge, MA, September

[IANA-ALLOCATION] Internet Assigned Numbers Authority,

[IANA-CONSIDERATIONS] Narten, T., and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for
Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs," RFC 2434, October 1998.

[IGMPv2] Fenner, W., "Internet Group Management Protocol, Version 2,"
RFC 2236, November 1997.

[IGMPv3] Cain, B., Deering, S., and A. Thyagarajan, "Internet Group
Management Protocol, Version 3," RFC 3376, October 2002.

[IPSEC] S. Kent, R. Atkinson, "Security Architecture for the Internet
Protocol.", RFC 2401.

[MLDv2] R. Vida, L. Costa, R. Zara, S. Fdida, S. Deering, B. Fenner, I.
Kouvelas, B. Haberman.  "Multicast Listener Discovery Version 2 (MLDv2)
for IPv6."  Work in Progress.

[MSFAPI] Thaler, D., Fenner, B., and Quinn, B.  "Socket Interface
Extensions for Multicast Source Filters."  Work in Progress.

[PIM-SM] Estrin, D., Farinacci, D., Helmy, A., Thaler, D., Deering, S.,
Handley, M., Jacobson, V., Liu, C., Sharma, P. and L. Wei, "Protocol
Independent Multicast-Sparse Mode (PIM-SM): Protocol Specification," RFC
2362, June 1998.

[PIM-DM] Deering, S., Estrin, D., Farinacci, D., Jacobson, V., Helmy,
A., Meyer, D., and L. Wei, "Protocol Independent Multicast Version 2
Dense Mode Specification," Work in Progress.

[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels," RFC 2119, March 1997.

[RFC2710] S. Deering, W. Fenner, B. Haberman, "Multicast Listener
Discovery (MLD) for IPv6", RFC 2710, October 1999.

[RFC2771] Finlayson, R., "An Abstract API for Multicast Address
Allocation," RFC 2771, February 2000.

[SIMPLE] R. Perlman, C-Y Lee, A. Ballardie, J. Crowcroft, Z. Wang, T.
Maufer, C. Diot, and M. Green.  "Simple Multicast: A Design for Simple,
Low-Overhead Multicast."  Work in Progress.

Holbrook/Cain                                                  [Page 13]

INTERNET-DRAFT          Source-Specific Multicast             3 Nov 2002

[SMRP] Green, M.  "Method and System of Multicast Routing for Groups
with a Single Transmitter."  United States Patent Number 5,517,494.

12.  Author's Address

     Brad Cain
     Cereva Networks
     3 Network Drive
     Marlborough, MA 01752

     Hugh Holbrook
     Cisco Systems
     170 W. Tasman Drive
     San Jose, CA 95134

This document expires May 3, 2003.

Holbrook/Cain                                                  [Page 14]