Multicast - No ip pim dm-fallback vs. Sink RP

From: Schulz, Dave (DSchulz@dpsciences.com)
Date: Mon Sep 12 2005 - 15:10:50 GMT-3

Next message: Anthony Sequeira: "Re: Multicast - No ip pim dm-fallback vs. Sink RP"
Previous message: Jens Petter Eikeland: "SV: redistribution between eigrp and ospf"
Next in thread: Anthony Sequeira: "Re: Multicast - No ip pim dm-fallback vs. Sink RP"
Maybe reply: Anthony Sequeira: "Re: Multicast - No ip pim dm-fallback vs. Sink RP"
Maybe reply: Schulz, Dave: "RE: Multicast - No ip pim dm-fallback vs. Sink RP"
Maybe reply: Chris Lewis \(chrlewis\): "RE: Multicast - No ip pim dm-fallback vs. Sink RP"
Maybe reply: Edwards, Andrew M: "RE: Multicast - No ip pim dm-fallback vs. Sink RP"
Maybe reply: Schulz, Dave: "RE: Multicast - No ip pim dm-fallback vs. Sink RP"
Maybe reply: Chris Lewis \(chrlewis\): "RE: Multicast - No ip pim dm-fallback vs. Sink RP"
Maybe reply: Scott Morris: "RE: Multicast - No ip pim dm-fallback vs. Sink RP"
Maybe reply: Schulz, Dave: "RE: Multicast - No ip pim dm-fallback vs. Sink RP"
Maybe reply: Schulz, Dave: "RE: Multicast - No ip pim dm-fallback vs. Sink RP"
Maybe reply: Scott Morris: "RE: Multicast - No ip pim dm-fallback vs. Sink RP"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

If there is a requirement that requires you to use Auto-RP, which means
using sparse-dense mode. And, another requirement to insure that you
never go into dense mode.....is it more correct to:

1. Use the command - "no ip pim dm-fallback"

Or,

2. Use the "sink RP" configuration that cisco details in the
following white-paper.....

http://cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk828/technologies_white_paper09186a00800d6b
63.shtml

Thoughts?

Dave Schulz
Email: dschulz@dpsciences.com <mailto:dschulz@dpsciences.com >

Next message: Anthony Sequeira: "Re: Multicast - No ip pim dm-fallback vs. Sink RP"
Previous message: Jens Petter Eikeland: "SV: redistribution between eigrp and ospf"
Next in thread: Anthony Sequeira: "Re: Multicast - No ip pim dm-fallback vs. Sink RP"
Maybe reply: Anthony Sequeira: "Re: Multicast - No ip pim dm-fallback vs. Sink RP"
Maybe reply: Schulz, Dave: "RE: Multicast - No ip pim dm-fallback vs. Sink RP"
Maybe reply: Chris Lewis \(chrlewis\): "RE: Multicast - No ip pim dm-fallback vs. Sink RP"
Maybe reply: Edwards, Andrew M: "RE: Multicast - No ip pim dm-fallback vs. Sink RP"
Maybe reply: Schulz, Dave: "RE: Multicast - No ip pim dm-fallback vs. Sink RP"
Maybe reply: Chris Lewis \(chrlewis\): "RE: Multicast - No ip pim dm-fallback vs. Sink RP"
Maybe reply: Scott Morris: "RE: Multicast - No ip pim dm-fallback vs. Sink RP"
Maybe reply: Schulz, Dave: "RE: Multicast - No ip pim dm-fallback vs. Sink RP"
Maybe reply: Schulz, Dave: "RE: Multicast - No ip pim dm-fallback vs. Sink RP"
Maybe reply: Scott Morris: "RE: Multicast - No ip pim dm-fallback vs. Sink RP"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Oct 02 2005 - 14:40:14 GMT-3