From: Nico van Niekerk (nico@vanniekerk.co.za)
Date: Tue Nov 23 2004 - 07:12:42 GMT-3
That's exactly it. Checking tool is a good term here.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: k carter [mailto:kieren.carter@postremo.co.uk]
> Sent: Tuesday, 23 November 2004 8:29 PM
> To: 'Nico van Niekerk'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: The "ip pim rp-announce-filter" command
>
>
> Hi Nico,
>
> Thanks for your response.
>
> The reason for the ACL on R3 is to allow this router to advertise itself
> as a cRP for both 224.0.0.0/8 and 224.0.0.0/4, not just the default of
> 224.0.0.0/4. If I take out the 2nd line as suggested it will only
> advertise out 224.0.0.0/8 and not the 224.0.0.0/4. This will means that
> the mapping agent will only get this one group and use the filter to
> check that this group is allowed (basically a double check, esp. good if
> you don't have control of cRP but, imho, not what I would call a
> filtering tool).
>
> What I thought might be possible with this command is to have 10 cRP's
> advertise 10 groups which they can be an RP for, and then on the mapping
> agent use this command to filter out which groups different cRP's can be
> considered for.
>
> Are you saying that the filter only confirms what groups the cRP is
> sending matches exactly as the mapping agent believes it such receive.
> Obviously, if you have configured the cRP correctly (I know it always
> helps to double check) then there shouldn't be a problem.
>
> Therefore, from the mapping agents viewpoint, instead of thinking "the
> cRP can look after X,Y,Z" and I, the mapping agent, will only accept it
> as a cRP for X and Y, it thinks "the cRP says it can look after X,Y,Z" ,
> this is what I thought the cRP was going to advertise, therefore I will
> accept it?
>
> Am I on the right track here thinking that the command acts more like a
> checking tool, rather than a filtering one?
>
> Hope that this e-mail isn't too confusing but I thought that the command
> was more powerful.
>
> Cheers
>
> Kieren
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> Nico van Niekerk
> Sent: Monday, November 22, 2004 9:32 PM
> To: kieren.carter@postremo.co.uk; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: The "ip pim rp-announce-filter" command
>
> The rp-announce-filter must match exactly what the cRP is advertising.
> Why the following acl?
> access-list 10 permit 224.0.0.0 0.255.255.255
> access-list 10 permit 224.0.0.0 15.255.255.255
>
> Try leaving out the 2nd line of the cRP's acl and leave out the deny
> line of
> the Mapping Agent's acl (Make the acl's identical).
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
> > kieren.carter@postremo.co.uk
> > Sent: Tuesday, 23 November 2004 3:02 AM
> > To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: The "ip pim rp-announce-filter" command
> >
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I wonder if someone could shed a bit of light on the use of the
> > ip pim rp-announce-filter command within Cisco Auto-RP.
> >
> > I have a very basic network setup for testing consisting of three
> > routers connected via serial connections as shown below (this is
> > part of a bigger test network, thats why there is R3, R4 and R2):
> >
> > (R3)-----------/ \-----------(R2)
> > /-------------(R4)-------------\
> >
> >
> > I am using Loopbacks on all routers with the following IP addresses:
> >
> > R2 Loopback Interface = 10.0.52.1/24
> > R3 Loopback Interface = 10.0.53.1/24
> > R4 Loopback Interface = 10.0.54.1/24
> >
> > All of the interfaces on the router are configured with ip pim
> > sparse-dense-mode.
> >
> > I have configured R2 and R3 as Candidate RPs and R4 is
> > configured as the RP mapping agent. Below is the configuration
> > for both R2 and R3 allowing them to advertise themselves as RPs:
> >
> > R2:
> > !
> > ip multicast-routing
> > !
> > ip pim send-rp-announce Loopback0 scope 6 interval 10
> > !
> >
> >
> > R3:
> > !
> > ip multicast-routing
> > !
> > ip pim send-rp-announce Loopback0 scope 6 group-list 10 interval 10
> > !
> > access-list 10 permit 224.0.0.0 0.255.255.255
> > access-list 10 permit 224.0.0.0 15.255.255.255
> >
> >
> > Each of the cRPs advertises out every 10 seconds for the ease of
> > troubleshooting. On R3 I have configured the cRP so that it will
> > advertise out itself as a cRP for 224.0.0.0/8 and
> > 224.0.0.0/4. On the mapping agent I want to filter the cRPs
> > so that it will only consider R2 (10.0.52.1) as a cRP for the
> > range 224.0.0.0/4 but Im not having much luck getting this to
> > work as expected. The configuration for the R4, the mapping agent is:
> >
> > R4:
> > ip multicast-routing
> > !
> > ip pim rp-announce-filter rp-list 10 group-list 11
> > ip pim send-rp-discovery Loopback0 scope 5
> > !
> > access-list 10 permit 10.0.53.1
> > access-list 11 permit 224.0.0.0 0.255.255.255
> > access-list 11 deny 224.0.0.0 15.255.255.255
> >
> >
> > The ip pim rp-announce-filter identifies any of the cRP that I
> > want to apply a filter to, in this case I only want to tie a
> > filter to 10.0.53.1 (R3). The filter I want to apply is given in
> > the group-list, highlighting that I want to permit this router as
> > a cRP for 224.0.0.0/8 but deny it as a cRP for the range
> > 224.0.0.0/4. Unfortunately, it doesnt seem to be working as
> > desired, the debugging for the auto-rp announcements shows that
> > 10.0.53.1 (R3) is sending an RP-announce message for
> > 224.0.0.0/4 and 224.0.0.0/8 and both of these and both are
> > being accepted:
> >
> > R4#debu ip pim auto-rp
> > PIM Auto-RP debugging is on
> > R4#clear ip pim rp-mapping
> > 03:07:52: Auto-RP: Received RP-announce, from 10.0.52.1, RP_cnt 1, ht
> 31
> > 03:07:52: Auto-RP: Update (224.0.0.0/4, RP:10.0.52.1), PIMv2 v1
> > 03:07:52: Auto-RP: Received RP-announce, from 10.0.52.1, RP_cnt 1, ht
> 31
> > 03:07:52: Auto-RP: Update (224.0.0.0/4, RP:10.0.52.1), PIMv2 v1
> > 03:07:52: Auto-RP: Received RP-announce, from 10.0.52.1, RP_cnt 1, ht
> 31
> > 03:07:52: Auto-RP: Update (224.0.0.0/4, RP:10.0.52.1), PIMv2 v1
> > 03:07:59: Auto-RP: Received RP-announce, from 10.0.53.1, RP_cnt 1, ht
> 31
> > 03:07:59: Auto-RP: Update (224.0.0.0/8, RP:10.0.53.1), PIMv2 v1
> > 03:07:59: Auto-RP: Update (224.0.0.0/4, RP:10.0.53.1), PIMv2 v1
> > 03:07:59: Auto-RP: Received RP-announce, from 10.0.53.1, RP_cnt 1, ht
> 31
> > 03:07:59: Auto-RP: Update (224.0.0.0/8, RP:10.0.53.1), PIMv2 v1
> > 03:07:59: Auto-RP: Update (224.0.0.0/4, RP:10.0.53.1), PIMv2 v1
> > 03:07:59: Auto-RP: Received RP-announce, from 10.0.53.1, RP_cnt 1, ht
> 31
> > 03:07:59: Auto-RP: Update (224.0.0.0/8, RP:10.0.53.1), PIMv2 v1
> > 03:07:59: Auto-RP: Update (224.0.0.0/4, RP:10.0.53.1), PIMv2 v1
> > 03:07:59: Auto-RP: Received RP-announce, from 10.0.53.1, RP_cnt 1, ht
> 31
> >
> > This means that R3 is winning the RP election based on IP address
> > for 224.0.0.0/4 as shown below:
> >
> > R4#show ip pim rp mapping
> > PIM Group-to-RP Mappings
> > This system is an RP-mapping agent (Loopback0)
> >
> > Group(s) 224.0.0.0/8
> > RP 10.0.53.1 (?), v2v1
> > Info source: 10.0.53.1 (?), elected via Auto-RP
> > Uptime: 00:03:27, expires: 00:00:23
> > Group(s) 224.0.0.0/4
> > RP 10.0.53.1 (?), v2v1
> > Info source: 10.0.53.1 (?), elected via Auto-RP
> > Uptime: 00:03:27, expires: 00:00:23
> > RP 10.0.52.1 (?), v2v1
> > Info source: 10.0.52.1 (?), via Auto-RP
> > Uptime: 00:03:24, expires: 00:00:26
> >
> > I have played around with this command for a while, but I cant
> > seem to get the filtering to work as I want it to. For example,
> > I changed access-list 11 on R4 to:
> >
> > access-list 11 deny 224.0.0.0 0.255.255.255
> > access-list 11 permit 224.0.0.0 15.255.255.255
> >
> > The idea being that the 224.0.0.0/8 would be filtered and the
> > 224.0.0.0/4 would be accepted, but instead both of the groups get
> > filtered leaving only R2 (10.0.52.1) as a cRP:
> >
> > R4#
> > 03:27:19: Auto-RP: Received RP-announce, from 10.0.53.1, RP_cnt 1, ht
> 31
> > 03:27:19: Auto-RP: Filtered 224.0.0.0/8 for RP 10.0.53.1
> > 03:27:19: Auto-RP: Filtered 224.0.0.0/4 for RP 10.0.53.1
> > 03:27:19: Auto-RP: Received RP-announce, from 10.0.53.1, RP_cnt 1, ht
> 31
> > 03:27:19: Auto-RP: Filtered 224.0.0.0/8 for RP 10.0.53.1
> > 03:27:19: Auto-RP: Filtered 224.0.0.0/4 for RP 10.0.53.1
> > 03:27:19: Auto-RP: Received RP-announce, from 10.0.53.1, RP_cnt 1, ht
> 31
> > 03:27:19: Auto-RP: Filtered 224.0.0.0/8 for RP 10.0.53.1
> > 03:27:19: Auto-RP: Filtered 224.0.0.0/4 for RP 10.0.53.1
> > 03:27:19: Auto-RP: Received RP-announce, from 10.0.53.1, RP_cnt 1, ht
> 31
> >
> > R4#show ip pim rp mapping
> > PIM Group-to-RP Mappings
> > This system is an RP-mapping agent (Loopback0)
> >
> > Group(s) 224.0.0.0/4
> > RP 10.0.52.1 (?), v2v1
> > Info source: 10.0.52.1 (?), elected via Auto-RP
> > Uptime: 00:01:34, expires: 00:00:26
> >
> > Has anyone came across this issue before or am I missing
> > something very basic.
> >
> > This could be be an IOS specific problem (IOS 12.2(24a) is used
> > on the routers at the moment).
> >
> > I wanted to include as much information as possible so hope post
> > isn't too big!
> >
> > Thanks in advance to anyone who is able shed light on this one :-)
> >
> > cheers
> >
> > Kieren
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________________________________
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Dec 02 2004 - 06:57:49 GMT-3