Auto-RP vs. static RP

From: Peter Ding (pding@cisco.com)
Date: Sat Oct 09 2004 - 16:04:08 GMT-3

• Next message: Grant Stevenson: "Re: Cisco Removes VoIP ?'s from R&S"
• Previous message: Ludwig Morales: "Re: Cisco Removes VoIP ?'s from R&S"
• Next in thread: robbie: "Re: Auto-RP vs. static RP"
• Maybe reply: robbie: "Re: Auto-RP vs. static RP"
• Maybe reply: joshua lauer: "Re: Auto-RP vs. static RP"
• Maybe reply: Craig Dorry: "Re: Auto-RP vs. static RP"
• Maybe reply: samccie2004@yahoo.co.uk: "RE: Auto-RP vs. static RP"
• Maybe reply: Brian McGahan: "RE: Auto-RP vs. static RP"
• Maybe reply: ccie2be: "Re: Auto-RP vs. static RP"
• Maybe reply: ccie2be: "Re: Auto-RP vs. static RP"
• Maybe reply: jean.paul.baaklini@accenture.com: "RE: Auto-RP vs. static RP"
• Maybe reply: Peter Ding: "RE: Auto-RP vs. static RP"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Since both auto-rp and static rp can be used in PIM SM mode, what are the
criterias that will lead me to use one over other?

Thanks,

PD

• Next message: Grant Stevenson: "Re: Cisco Removes VoIP ?'s from R&S"
• Previous message: Ludwig Morales: "Re: Cisco Removes VoIP ?'s from R&S"
• Next in thread: robbie: "Re: Auto-RP vs. static RP"
• Maybe reply: robbie: "Re: Auto-RP vs. static RP"
• Maybe reply: joshua lauer: "Re: Auto-RP vs. static RP"
• Maybe reply: Craig Dorry: "Re: Auto-RP vs. static RP"
• Maybe reply: samccie2004@yahoo.co.uk: "RE: Auto-RP vs. static RP"
• Maybe reply: Brian McGahan: "RE: Auto-RP vs. static RP"
• Maybe reply: ccie2be: "Re: Auto-RP vs. static RP"
• Maybe reply: ccie2be: "Re: Auto-RP vs. static RP"
• Maybe reply: jean.paul.baaklini@accenture.com: "RE: Auto-RP vs. static RP"
• Maybe reply: Peter Ding: "RE: Auto-RP vs. static RP"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Nov 06 2004 - 17:11:45 GMT-3