From: John Neiberger (neiby@xxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Sat Mar 30 2002 - 14:01:38 GMT-3
Nope, this was just on a 2500 router. I have four routers that
have interfaces in the 224.1.1.1 group and a fifth router is
running PIM and is the RP. I'm starting to think that it has
something to do with my topology, because my ping results would
vary greatly depending on which router I was on.
On two of the routers I would only receive one reply for each
ping, which is as I was expecting. Only on the RP and a router
directly attached to the RP do I get multiple responses for
each ping packet.
John
---- On Sat, 30 Mar 2002, steven.j.nelson@bt.com
(steven.j.nelson@bt.com) wrote:
> John
>
> What kit are you using, is this on a Cat 6500 using IGMP II
and an MSFC
> perhaps.
>
> I have seen issues like this with IGMP where MLS is turned on
in the cat
> and
> it seriously screws multicasting up.
>
> Cheers
>
> Steve
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Neiberger [mailto:neiby@ureach.com]
> Sent: 30 March 2002 04:24
> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Multicast Pings
>
>
> Take a look at this. When I ping a multicast address--using
a
> single packet--I get multiple replies from the same IP
> addresses. Why would an end station respond more than once
to
> a single ping?
>
> R6#ping 224.1.1.1
>
> Type escape sequence to abort.
> Sending 1, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 224.1.1.1, timeout is 2
> seconds:
>
> Reply to request 0 from 172.16.86.8, 44 ms
> Reply to request 0 from 172.16.100.3, 236 ms
> Reply to request 0 from 172.16.135.1, 152 ms
> Reply to request 0 from 172.16.100.5, 144 ms
> Reply to request 0 from 172.16.135.1, 144 ms
> Reply to request 0 from 172.16.100.5, 136 ms
> Reply to request 0 from 172.16.100.3, 136 ms
> Reply to request 0 from 172.16.86.8, 80 ms
> Reply to request 0 from 172.16.86.8, 76 ms
> Reply to request 0 from 172.16.135.1, 72 ms
> Reply to request 0 from 172.16.100.5, 68 ms
> Reply to request 0 from 172.16.86.8, 56 ms
> Reply to request 0 from 172.16.100.3, 52 ms
> R6#
>
> I've noticed this before but I didn't really think about it
> much. Now I'm really wondering why this occurs.
>
> Do any of you know?
>
> Thanks,
> John
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:57:26 GMT-3