From: George Amen (george.amen@gmail.com)
Date: Sat Oct 22 2005 - 12:42:27 GMT-3
I have similar qs for Lab#5 Multicast Qs:
- Its an Auto-RP qs, with 2 RPs, 1 MA
- We are asked to control RP announcements centrally at MA by using filtering
Given the solution, what I would like to understand is following:
1. If we are controlling RP-announcements by filtering at MA, why does
the solution also suggests to use a group-list at each RP to only
announce a specific set of groups?
2. So I did configure the rp-announce filter on MA and
"send-rp-announcement" followed by a group list at each RP..... I
noticed something was still wrong,,, my MA wasnt behaving as
expected.... so I went into each RP and also filtered 224.0.1.39 and
224.0.1.40...(dont know why I did it,, remember reading sometime
back)... and then things started to work normally.....
So, do we need to filter these adminstratively scoped groups on RP's
in an Auto-RP configuration or does this happen by default as Mapping
Agent becomes the owner of these groups.....?
If configs are required I can send those but i would like to
understand the concept behind the above 2 bullets (generalized for any
Auto-RP qs)
Thanks
-GA
On 10/21/05, Brian McGahan <bmcgahan@internetworkexpert.com> wrote:
> > Is this the consensus of how it should be working? Am I missing
> anything
> > here? Doesn't this configuration have the same effect as using the
> > priority option in the BSR configuration to influence which RP gest to
> be
> > the RP for a group?
>
> This is how it should be working, but it's not the same as the
> priority option. With the priority option you're telling the BSR to
> prefer candidate RP X over RP Y, but if X is unavailable use Y. With
> the announce filter you're saying prefer X over Y because Y is filtered
> out. If X is down Y still can't be used because you filtered it out.
>
>
> HTH,
>
> Brian McGahan, CCIE #8593
> bmcgahan@internetworkexpert.com
>
> Internetwork Expert, Inc.
> http://www.InternetworkExpert.com
> Toll Free: 877-224-8987 x 705
> Outside US: 775-826-4344 x 705
> 24/7 Support: http://forum.internetworkexpert.com
> Live Chat: http://www.internetworkexpert.com/chat/
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
> Of
> > Chris Lewis
> > Sent: Friday, October 21, 2005 9:46 AM
> > To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: ip pim rp-announce-filter again
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I had difficulty following all the views expressed on this thread, so
> > labbed it up to see if I could get what I thought was the desired
> > behavior. The desired behavior being could I use the ip pim
> rp-announce-
> > filter by itself to influence which rp is selected for which groups.
> >
> > This is my topology
> >
> > R3 R2 R4
> > \ | /
> > R1
> > |
> > R6
> >
> > unicast and pim are setup with appropriate reachability and neighbor
> > relationships.
> >
> > R2 and R4 have loopbacks 192.168.2.2 and 192.168.4.4 respectively and
> are
> > setup to be candidate RPs for the group 225.1.1.1 only
> >
> > R3 is the mapping agent and I test my results by looking at the sho ip
> pim
> > rp mapp output on R6
> >
> > With no filters in place, R6 shows the following:
> >
> > Router6#sho ip pim rp mapp
> > PIM Group-to-RP Mappings
> > Group(s) 225.1.1.1/32
> > RP 192.168.4.4 (?), v2v1
> > Info source: 192.168.3.3 (?), elected via Auto-RP
> > Uptime: 00:08:59, expires: 00:02:54
> > Router6#
> >
> > This is as expected, as the highest IP address becomes the RP for the
> > group. If I want to change the RP to be R2 instead without changing
> the
> > configuration of R2 or R4, I place the following on R3.
> >
> > access-list 1 permit 192.168.4.4
> > access-list 2 deny 225.1.1.1
> > access-list 2 permit any
> > !
> > ip pim rp-announce-filter rp 1 group 2
> >
> > Then clear the rp mappings on R6 and see the following:
> >
> > Router6#sho ip pim rp mapp
> > PIM Group-to-RP Mappings
> > Group(s) 225.1.1.1/32
> > RP 192.168.2.2 (?), v2v1
> > Info source: 192.168.3.3 (?), elected via Auto-RP
> > Uptime: 00:00:58, expires: 00:02:00
> > Router6#
> >
> > This shows that I have been able to use the rp-announce-filter on the
> > mapping agent to deny an RP for a group and change the RP selected for
> > that group.
> >
> > When I first configured this as the documentation suggests, I was not
> > using deny statements in the access lists and could not influence RP
> > selection.
> >
> > Is this the consensus of how it should be working? Am I missing
> anything
> > here? Doesn't this configuration have the same effect as using the
> > priority option in the BSR configuration to influence which RP gest to
> be
> > the RP for a group?
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________________________________
> > 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 : Sun Nov 06 2005 - 22:00:52 GMT-3