From: Tony Paterra (apaterra@gmail.com)
Date: Wed May 17 2006 - 20:15:24 ART
Brian,
Thanks for the clarification. As a best practice is it safe to go an
put static default mroutes on multicast routers that appear on the
edge of the network (but probably have a unicast routing table that
will cause RPF checks)?
Adios,
Tony
On May 16, 2006, at 10:07 AM, Brian McGahan wrote:
>> 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
>>
>>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> _
>> Subscription information may be found at:
>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
Tony Paterra
apaterra@gmail.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 01 2006 - 06:33:21 ART