From: joshua lauer (jslauer@hotmail.com)
Date: Sat Oct 09 2004 - 17:51:54 GMT-3
for small implementations I like static, we dont use Auto-RP in our network
since it's so small but we do have need for multicast. I'm no multicast wiz
either, I have understanding at about a 4th grade level........but I'm
getting there and getting better by the day :)
josh
Josh Lauer
----- Original Message -----
From: "robbie" <robbie@packetized.org>
To: "Group Study" <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 09, 2004 4:43 PM
Subject: Re: Auto-RP vs. static RP
> Peter Ding wrote:
>> 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
>>
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>> Subscription information may be found at:
>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>>
>>
>
> From what I have observed, usually static-RP is called for only when the
> lab specifies that a router should be used (in specific) as an RP instead
> of letting the m-tree devices decide on their own.
>
> Don't know if that answers your question, maybe someone else can shed a
> better light on the subject - I'm not yet a whiz at multicast.
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Nov 06 2004 - 17:11:45 GMT-3