From: Tim Fletcher (tim@fletchmail.net)
Date: Wed Dec 18 2002 - 15:28:46 GMT-3
ip multicast helper is UDP only so ping, which uses ICMP, will not work. We
need to come up with another test.
-Tim Fletcher
At 08:10 AM 12/18/2002 -0800, Ccie candidate wrote:
>Kumar,
>I agree with you.
>I've setup the following to test "ip multicast helper" command, but could
>not get the expected. (i.e host for example from R6 generated ping traffic
>is only getting response from the local router (R4), but could not see any
>traffic on the remote router R5). This is becoming really interesting.
>
>
>See below.
>
>R2(f81/0)---(e0/0)R5(s0/0.45)-----(s1.45)R4(to0)----(to0/0)R6
>
>R2 and R6 are the hosts that does not support multicast.
>R6 generates a ping traffic to 148.9.46.255.
>
>
>######################
>Configs of the routers
>
>R2
>..
>..
>interface FastEthernet8/1/0
> ip address 148.9.222.1 255.255.255.0
> ip directed-broadcast
> no ip mroute-cache
> load-interval 30
> full-duplex
>
>R5
>..
>..
>interface Ethernet0/0
> ip address 148.9.222.10 255.255.255.0
> ip pim dense-mode
> ip multicast helper-map broadcast 228.1.1.1 101
> load-interval 30
> full-duplex
>
>interface Serial0/0.45 point-to-point
> ip address 148.9.45.5 255.255.255.0
> ip pim dense-mode
> ip multicast helper-map 228.1.1.1 148.9.222.255 101
> ip ospf message-digest-key 1 md5 cisco
> frame-relay interface-dlci 504
>
>R4
>..
>..
>interface Serial1.45 point-to-point
> ip address 148.9.45.4 255.255.255.0
> ip pim dense-mode
> ip multicast helper-map 228.1.1.1 148.9.46.255 101
> ip ospf message-digest-key 1 md5 cisco
> frame-relay interface-dlci 405
>..
>interface TokenRing0
> ip address 148.9.46.4 255.255.255.0
> ip pim dense-mode
> ip multicast helper-map broadcast 228.1.1.1 101
> ip ospf authentication-key cisco
> ring-speed 16
>R6
>..
>..
>interface TokenRing0/0
> mtu 4464
> ip address 148.9.46.6 255.255.255.0
> ip directed-broadcast
> ip accounting access-violations
> ip multicast helper-map broadcast 228.1.1.1 2001
> ip ospf authentication-key cisco
> ip ospf priority 2
> load-interval 30
> ring-speed 16
>
>####################
>R6 sends a broadcast packet in his domain.
>R6#ping 148.9.46.255
>
>Type escape sequence to abort.
>Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 148.9.46.255, timeout is 2 seconds:
>
>*Mar 22 00:57:38.246: ICMP: echo reply rcvd, src 148.9.46.4, dst
>148.9.46.6
>
>But (debug ip packet / debug ip mroute ) does not show any traffic on the
>R5 or R2.
>
>Anybody any idea what is missing here ?
>
>
>Kafkaf
>
>
> "Kumar, Senthil" <senthil.kumar@intechnology.co.uk> wrote:i am aiming
> for the same. but helper map doesnt seem to work..did debug ip packet to
> capture packets..no trace of this translation to be honest.when i have a
> pc with a default gateway and if i send a multicast even if the gateway
> is not doing a multicast routing it still receives the packet.but for it
> to forward it needs multicast routing (which is on), as the packet is a
> broadcast x.x.x.255/24 or a ff.ff.ff.ff mcast helper map can do this
> conversion to a multicast ip that we specify, which also means if we make
> a host in the multicast domain to join a group lets say 229.9.9.9and if
> we ask helper map to convert all broadcasts to this ip. the host should
> respond to the ping or atleast should receive the packet sourced from
> host. neither of this happens. is there a tested config with examples.
> not a great deal but it will be good to know..as i also thought i'd use
> nating but its not possible to map a /32 ip using pools a!
>nd static nating is not applicable. so the solution is either tunnels or
>helper-map. tunnel is a bit of too much as it needs a new ip (unnumbered
>is not the option here)so it is upto helper map to do that job..but it
>doesnt seem .. the problem with cisco web site is too many repetations and
>its all in bits and pieces.-----Original Message-----
>From: Ccie candidate [mailto:beacc1e@yahoo.com]
>Sent: 18 December 2002 13:09
>To: senthil.kumar@intechnology.co.uk
>Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com; SGarrett@cnitech.com; seadon@attbi.com
>Subject: RE: unicast-2-multicast
>
>
>Kumar,
>I believe is "ip multicast helper"just to map broadcast to multicast, and
>vice versa via the UDP port specified by an ACL. I don't think you can use
>it to map a specific host address.
>Does anybody has a different view of this ?
>
>Kafkaf
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>
>From: Kumar, Senthil [mailto:senthil.kumar@intechnology.co.uk]
>
>Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 5:08 AM
>
>To: Don; Sean Garrett
>
>Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>
>Subject: RE: unicast-2-multicast
>
>
>
>i did this.
>
>three routers connected back to back. r1 is the host connected to r2
>
>connected to r3 connected to r4.
>
>created a tunnel between r2 and r4 and enabled pim dense mode.
>
>the def gateway & mroute static 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 for r1 is r2.
>
>r4's ethernet joined group 229.9.9.9.
>
>r2 can reach this group via tunnel (ping 229.9.9.9 - router generates a
>
>multicast packet in all interfaces)
>
>r1 can't ping r4 unlesss the r2 has pim enabled on the interface connected
>
>to r2.
>
>did a multicast helper-map, udp forward in r2 .. no results.
>
>wondering if the example in the cisco web explaining mulitcast helper-map
>
>really works.
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>
>From: Don [mailto:seadon@attbi.com]
>
>Sent: 16 December 2002 19:54
>
>To: Sean Garrett
>
>Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>
>Subject: Re: unicast-2-multicast
>
>
>
>You do use a subnet on the tunnel. The problem with including the tunnel in
>
>a routing protocol is that the protocol sees the tunnel as a route. If the
>
>real route is also included in the same protocol, you get recursive errors
>
>and the tunnel shuts itself down. Real life often uses static routes to get
>
>aroung the problem, but this is usually not be allowed on the lab test. I
>
>don't even know if static mroutes are allowed. Another method that works is
>
>to only include one end of the tunnel in the routing protocol, but this
>
>results in some sub-optimal routes. This is all highly dependent on what
>
>you are trying to do with the tunnel. Having only one end included in the
>
>routing protocol and no static routes means the tunnel is only used for
>
>packets in that subnet only. And what use is that in an internal network?
>
>Don
>
>----- Original Message -----
>
>From: "Sean Garrett" <SGarrett@cnitech.com>
>
>To: "Don" <seadon@attbi.com>; "Kumar, Senthil"
>
><senthil.kumar@intechnology.co.uk>; "Abdallah Al-Suwailem"
>
><aalsuwailem@myrealbox.com>
>
>Cc: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>
>Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 11:27 AM
>
>Subject: RE: unicast-2-multicast
>
>
>
>If you aren't given a subnet to use on the tunnel itself,
>
>what should you use there? Chop up one of the /24s given
>
>at either end to use across the tunnel?
>
>-----Original Message-----
>
>From: Don [mailto:seadon@attbi.com]
>
>Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 11:01 AM
>
>To: Kumar, Senthil; Abdallah Al-Suwailem
>
>Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>
>Subject: Re: unicast-2-multicast
>
>
>
>You can use a tunnel interface to get multicast across a link that only
>
>supports unicast. Create a tunnel from one end to the other and then enable
>
>multicast on the tunnel interfaces (and, of course, on the router interfaces
>
>that do support multicast). This also works to load share multicast traffic
>
>across multple links, something multicast cannot do by itself. PIM requires
>
>all multicast interfaces to be in a unicast routing table and this can be a
>
>problem with tunnels. If so, add a static multicast route (ip mroute
>
>command) to fix this problem. See Doyle, Vol 2 page 596 for an example.
>
>Don
>
>----- Original Message -----
>
>From: "Kumar, Senthil" <senthil.kumar@intechnology.co.uk>
>
>To: "Abdallah Al-Suwailem" <aalsuwailem@myrealbox.com>; "Kumar, Senthil"
>
><senthil.kumar@intechnology.co.uk>
>
>Cc: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>
>Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 8:21 AM
>
>Subject: RE: unicast-2-multicast
>
>
>
> > many thanks for your reply. but i was wondering i could could map even all
>
> > unicasts to a host on a particular protocol and port number to convert it
>
> > into a multicast to feed the multicast domain.. i've tried using
>
>helper-map,
>
> > configs look okay but couldnt figure out a method to do testing with it.
>
>did
>
> > permit udp any any broadcast-2-multicast-2broadcast. did forward protocol
>
> > udp
>
> > and enabled directed-broadcast..did a ping on the local segment x.x.x.255
>
> > and 255.255.255.255 ..got reply from the local broadcast domain but the
>
> > remote never replied..
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > -----Original Message-----
>
> > From: Abdallah Al-Suwailem [mailto:aalsuwailem@myrealbox.com]
>
> > Sent: 16 December 2002 16:08
>
> > To: Kumar, Senthil
>
> > Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>
> > Subject: Re: unicast-2-multicast
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Hello
>
> >
>
> > check this command "r2(config-if)#ip multicast helper-map"
>
> >
>
> > r2(config-if)#ip multicast ?
>
> > boundary Boundary for administratively scoped multicast addresses
>
> > helper-map Broadcast to Multicast map OR Multicast to Broadcast map
>
> > rate-limit Rate limit multicast data packets
>
> > tagswitch Enable IP Multicast Tagswitching
>
> > ttl-threshold TTL threshold for multicast packets
>
> >
>
> > Thanks
>
> >
>
> > Abdallah
>
> >
>
> > Kumar, Senthil wrote:
>
> >
>
> > >can nat convert all traffic on a local network, @ port xx.udp to
>
> > mulitcast,
>
> > >haven't got a traffic generator to test.
>
> > >the idea is for the host on my brodcast lan to send data to multicast
>
> > >machines hops away. my firsthop doesnt do mulitcast routing..
>
> > >
>
> > >any ideas, help very appreciated.
>
> > >
>
> > >Thanks, Senthil
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > >________________________________________________________________________
>
> > >This message has been checked for all known viruses by the
>
> > >CitC Virus Scanning Service powered by SkyLabs. For further information
>
> > visit
>
> > >http://www.citc.it
>
> > >
>
> > >___
>
> > >.
>
> > ________________________________________________________________________
>
> > This message has been checked for all known viruses by the
>
> > CitC Virus Scanning Service powered by SkyLabs. For further information
>
> > visit
>
> > http://www.citc.it
>
> >
>
> > ___
>
> >
>
> > ________________________________________________________________________
>
> > This message has been checked for all known viruses by the
>
> > CitC Virus Scanning Service powered by SkyLabs. For further information
>
>visit
>
> > http://www.citc.it
>
> >
>
> > ___
>
> > .
>
>.
>
>.
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>This message has been checked for all known viruses by the
>
>CitC Virus Scanning Service powered by SkyLabs. For further information
>
>visit
>
>http://www.citc.it
>
>___
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>This message has been checked for all known viruses by the
>
>CitC Virus Scanning Service powered by SkyLabs. For further information visit
>
>http://www.citc.it
>
>___
>
>.
>---------------------------------
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
>________________________________________________________________________
>This message has been checked for all known viruses by the
>CitC Virus Scanning Service powered by SkyLabs. For further information visit
>http://www.citc.it
>
>___
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>This message has been checked for all known viruses by the
>CitC Virus Scanning Service powered by SkyLabs. For further information visit
>http://www.citc.it
>
>___
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
>.
.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jan 17 2003 - 17:21:48 GMT-3