From: Henry Chou (henchou@hotmail.com)
Date: Thu Jun 19 2003 - 12:55:10 GMT-3
Tim,
You need to take this issue immediately to your Cisco Account team. You are
doing Cisco a favor by raising issues such as this because you paid for
SmartNet and you're entitled to receive satisfactory services. Also, your
account team will help you avoid bad experience such as this next time you
open a TAC cases.
Henry
From: "Snow, Tim" <timothy.snow@eds.com>
Reply-To: "Snow, Tim" <timothy.snow@eds.com>
To: "'ccielab@groupstudy.com'" <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Subject: Cisco TAC satisfaction rating going down....
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 11:46:10 -0400
I opened a TAC case with the pim sparse-question that I had regarding
whether the RP needs to be told it is the RP. I got about 6 emails from
some of you and this is the response I got from the Cisco TAC. First off,
I don't see how he didn't understand what I was asking and it appears all
they want to do is send their customers a link to a webpage. Sheessh.
Here's my initial question, his response and then my follow-up response.
I've very surprised that you would just send me to a link on the website.
Isn't it obvious from my debugs and question that I know how to configure
multicast but was merely asking the question of "who was right?"
I wasn't asking whether I needed an RP or not, what I was asking was whether
the RP needed to be configured with it's own ip address which the "ip pim
rp-address" command.
I also made 2 specific references to books showing that one says basicallly
1) the RP needs itself to be configured, and the other says 2) The RIP
doesn't need to know and just assumes..
BTW, the 6 other people people that responded to my email to a cisco study
group had no problem understanding the question that I asked for the book
references that I made...
Tim
-----Original Message-----
From: <HIDDEN>
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 3:08 AM
To: timothy.snow@eds.com
Cc: timothy.snow@eds.com
Subject: Case EXXXXX - *ANS*Conguration and Overview of Multicast
Sparse Mode and Rendez-vous Points
Timothy,
Im not quite sure what you are asking but I can try to assist you at
the configuration of multicast. The cisco tac has not affiliation with Cisco
Press and cant really speak to thier accuracy. The configuration guidelines
here should be used when configuring Multicast.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/products/hw/switches/ps646/products_confi
guration_guide_chapter09186a008007f3c3.html
The only time you do not need to specify a RP address is when you are using
sparse-dense mode. When useing sparse mode a RP address will need to be
configured. Thanks...
-----Original Message-----
From: Snow, Tim [mailto:timothy.snow@eds.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 11:17 AM
To: 'ccielab@groupstudy.com'
Subject: PIM Sparse-Mode - Does RP have to know itself?
I have a question regarding PIM sparse-mode RP and
whether to tell the RP that
it is the RP. There seems to be some discrepancy with multiple cisco
press books. See below.
Per Jeff Doyle Vol II (pg 544, 1st paragraph, line 9) " The reason for
this statement on
this router, of course, is so that the router knows that is is the RP."
Contradicting that is Beau Williamson, Multicast (Pg 343, Note section)
"When the router,
whose address is in this field receives the (*,G) Join message, it sees
its own address
in this field and assumes that i must be the RP for the group. Therefor
a router always
assumes the duties of the RP for a group and time it receives a an
incoming (*,G) join
that contains the address of one of it's multicast-enabled interfaces in
this field"
*Feb 28 22:30:41: PIM: Received v2 Join/Prune on Serial0.95 from
10.2.3.5, to us
*Feb 28 22:30:41: PIM: Join-list: (*, 228.13.20.216) RP 10.224.1.1
*Feb 28 22:30:41: PIM: (*, 228.13.20.216) Join from 10.2.3.5 for invalid
RP 10.224.1.1
r9(config)#access-list 9 deny 224.0.1.39
r9(config)#access-list 9 deny 224.0.1.40
r9(config)#access-list 9 permit any
r9(config)#ip pim rp-address 10.224.1.1 9
*Feb 28 22:32:40: PIM: Received v2 Join/Prune on Serial0.95 from
10.2.3.5, to us
*Feb 28 22:32:40: PIM: Join-list: (*, 228.13.20.216) RP 10.224.1.1
*Feb 28 22:32:40: MRT: Create (*, 228.13.20.216), RPF Null, PC 0x353148E
*Feb 28 22:32:40: PIM: Check RP 10.224.1.1 into the (*, 228.13.20.216)
entry, RPT-bit
set, WC-bit set, S-bit set
*Feb 28 22:32:40: MRT: Add/Update Serial0.95/224.0.0.2 to the olist of
(*, 228.13.20.
216), Forward state
*Feb 28 22:32:40: PIM: Add Serial0.95/10.2.3.5 to (*, 228.13.20.216),
Forward state
As you can see above, it only worked when I told the RP about the RP
(that is, itself)
I did try turning on "ip pim sparse" due to Williamson saying "of one of
it's multicast
enabled interfaces" but that didn't work. I also tried configuring a
"ip pim accept-rp"
permitting everything but that didn't work.
Can anyone answer this for me?
Thanks.
TIm
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jul 04 2003 - 11:11:01 GMT-3