From: Brian McGahan (bmcgahan@internetworkexpert.com)
Date: Tue May 16 2006 - 11:07:12 ART
> interface? If R2 is the mapping agent, does it matter that it can't
> pass around the multicast address for cisco-rp-discovery?
Yes it does matter. Since the candidate RP sends its
announcements as a multicast to the mapping agent these must pass RPF as
they are forwarded. Likewise the mapping agents advertisements to the
rest of the PIM neighbors are multicast and must also pass RPF. An
alternative would be to use BSR because it uses a combination of unicast
and hop-by-hop communication.
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
> Tony Paterra
> Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 11:10 PM
> To: Cisco certification
> Subject: IEWB Vol. 1 Lab 1 Multicast RPF checks against the RP...
>
> I was going through the multicast portion of the first lab and (being
> a little fresh to mcast) have noticed some unexpected behaviors. R3
> is supposed to announce it's loopback as the RP for all multicast
> groups and R2 is supposed to announce it's loopback as the mapping
> agent. I understand these pieces, the real question... Is that I'm
> running debugs and seeing RPF check failures on R5 for (150.1.2.2,
> 224.0.1.40) because of the unicast routing table.
>
> Is this the way this is supposed to operate? Are there any other ways
> around this outside of static mroutes or enabling multicast on the
> necessary interfaces to reach R5 on the proper (ethernet0/0)
> interface? If R2 is the mapping agent, does it matter that it can't
> pass around the multicast address for cisco-rp-discovery?
>
> Thanks in advance,
> --
> Tony Paterra
> apaterra@gmail.com
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 01 2006 - 06:33:21 ART