From: mariam.tatevik@yahoo.com
Date: Fri Apr 06 2007 - 13:59:28 ART
Hi,
did you test with DYNAMIPS too ?
R4 ----- PIM SM ----- R1 ----- PIM SM ----- R2
Only Loopbacks were used e.g.
Source R1-Loopback ==> Dest. R2-Loop1 IGMPv3
Source R1 (loopback) ==> Dest. R2-Loop2 IGMPv2
Source R4 (Loopback) ==> Dest. R2-Loop2 IGMPv2
All ping were extended like
R1#ping
Protocol [ip]:
Target IP address: 232.200.200.200
Repeat count [1]:
Datagram size [100]:
Timeout in seconds [2]:
Extended commands [n]: y
Interface [All]: FastEthernet0/0.12
Time to live [255]:
Source address: Loopback0
Type of service [0]:
Set DF bit in IP header? [no]:
Validate reply data? [no]:
Data pattern [0xABCD]:
Loose, Strict, Record, Timestamp, Verbose[none]:
Sweep range of sizes [n]:
Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 1, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 232.200.200.200, timeout is 2 seconds:
Packet sent with a source address of 10.10.1.1
Reply to request 0 from 12.12.12.2, 184 ms
You wrote "I think this explains the theory that
PIM is multicast routing protocol"
What does mean?
I cannot understand "1-hop-success" ;-(
Any explanations ?
Internet Group Management Protocol (IGMP) is used to dynamically register individual hosts in a multicast group on a particular local-area network. Enabling PIM on an interface also enables IGMP.
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios124/124cg/himc_c/chap10/mcbcigmp.htm
I did not find a statement like
"YOU MUST ACTIVATE PIM BEFORE ip igmp join-group
otherwise your MC group is reachable for 1-hop-sources" ;-)
Thanks
===========================================
Hi,
I just tested after reading carefully your mail :)
I see these result
If I enable IGMP v1, 2 and 3 without enabling PIM, I am able to ping in
one hop.
You mentioned that you were not able to ping IGMP v3 from one hop
without PIM enabled on the interface. But I am able to.
I think this explains the theory that PIM is multicast routing protocol. I
am very much interested to discuss more detail if you want to.
Thanks,
Anees.
mariam.tatevik@yahoo.com wrote:
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