From: mariam.tatevik@yahoo.com
Date: Fri Apr 06 2007 - 12:26:37 ART
Thanks a lot for your feedback.
of course I used source x.x.x.x
My question was/is
Is it the absolutely necessity
to activate PIM on an interface which
will be used for igmp join-group ?
In "legacy" IGMPv2 I was able to
ping to an loopback interface w/o Active PIM
(but only from 1 "hop distance").
Is it a general or just best practice ?
Pls any comments
=======================================
You need to add
int fa 0/0
ip pim sparse-mode
ip pim igmp version 3
ip igmp join-group 239.50.50.50 source 1.1.1.1
You need to mention the source in the igmp version 3.
Thanks,
Anees.
mariam.tatevik@yahoo.com wrote:
Hello MC Gurus !
I do need a feedback, pls...
============================================
Hi GS,
testing PIM SSM by means of DYNAMIPS and trying
to verify the "best config" for PIM SSM
R4 ----- PIM SM ----- R1 ----- PIM SM ----- R2
all routers with PIM SM & PIM SSM DEF
R2 has Loopbacks with IP IGMP v3 & JOING-GROUPs 232.x.x.x
==>> It was not possible to ping w/o PIM activation on Loopbacks
Who could confirm this behavior based on REAL gears ?
Moreover, for usual IGMPv2 groups on R2 (with AutoRP listener)
it was possible to ping loopback-groups (239.y.y.y) from R1 only.
From R4 solid pings are possible only to the groups on a Loopback
with active PIM SM!
Is that a "hop" problem ?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue May 01 2007 - 08:28:35 ART