From: steve r (route2hell@hotmail.com)
Date: Wed Jul 23 2003 - 17:37:59 GMT-3
Is it legal to use Policy based routing, if it is a last resort and setup to
match certain types traffic
Steve
----- Original Message -----
From: <Ken.Farrington@barclayscapital.com>
To: <p729@cox.net>; <mohit.sharma@hp.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2003 5:17 AM
Subject: RE: Anycast RP
> The documentation is incorrect. Had this confirmed by Cisco :))
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: P729 [mailto:p729@cox.net]
> Sent: 14 July 2003 00:28
> To: SHARMA,MOHIT (HP-Germany,ex1); ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: Anycast RP
>
>
> I'm not a multicast guru, but I believe you are correct. The whole point
of
> Anycast RP with Auto-RP is to advertise the same IP address for the RP so
> that the nearest (topologically) RP is used when both are up and then to
> take advantage of a fast converging routing protocol to failover to the
> other RP when one of them goes down. Perhaps a typo carried over from the
> "Auto-RP with Multiple RPs" scenario.
>
> Regards,
>
> Mas Kato
> https://ecardfile.com/id/mkato
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "SHARMA,MOHIT (HP-Germany,ex1)" <mohit.sharma@hp.com>
> To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Sunday, July 13, 2003 5:53 AM
> Subject: Anycast RP
>
>
> Hi All,
>
> Has anyone checked this config on the CD for anycast rp
>
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/cisintwk/intsolns/mcst_sol/rps.htm#x
> tocid12
>
> In the config for anycast RP with Auto-RP scenario, they are using Lo0 for
> router 75a to source the rp-announce.
> ip pim send-rp-announce Loopback0 scope 32 group-list 10
>
> ip pim send-rp-discovery Loopback0 scope 32
>
> The question is, should'nt they use Lo 1 here?? As that is the interface
> with the commomon IP for both the routers.
> I guess that was the whole point of the excercise to make them redundant.
>
> Any Multicast Guru, kindly Comment.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mohit.
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> You are subscribed to the GroupStudy.com CCIE R&S Discussion Group.
>
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> You are subscribed to the GroupStudy.com CCIE R&S Discussion Group.
>
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> For more information about Barclays Capital, please
> visit our web site at http://www.barcap.com.
>
>
> Internet communications are not secure and therefore the Barclays
> Group does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this
> message. Although the Barclays Group operates anti-virus programmes,
> it does not accept responsibility for any damage whatsoever that is
> caused by viruses being passed. Any views or opinions presented are
> solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the
> Barclays Group. Replies to this email may be monitored by the Barclays
> Group for operational or business reasons.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> You are subscribed to the GroupStudy.com CCIE R&S Discussion Group.
>
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Aug 06 2003 - 06:52:50 GMT-3