From: ISolveSystems (support@isolvesystems.com)
Date: Thu Aug 23 2007 - 14:58:40 ART
Thanks for your reply Joe. Please let me know what you find out on Sunday.
My finding is that the first packet got sent to both interfaces. Second
packet only goes out the tunnel interface because the other interface has
been prunned.
Thanks.
On 8/23/07, Joseph Brunner <joe@affirmedsystems.com> wrote:
>
> By virtue of the igp load balancing the tunnel source/destination unicast
> addresses.... if I recall I did this lab first in Early June, as it was
> very
> fun and challenging...
>
> I'll be doing it again Sunday evening...
>
> -Joe
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> ISolveSystems
> Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2007 1:23 PM
> To: Cisco certification
> Subject: IEWB 13 Task 4.2 - IP PIM Dense mode load balancing
>
> R5,R3, R2, R1 are connected through Serial int. Pim dense-mode is enable
> on
> all interfaces of R5, R3, R2, but not R1.
>
> R5------R1------R3
> \ /
> \ /
> \R2 /
>
>
> Tunnel is built from R3 to R5. Ip igmp join-group 225.5.5.5 is issued on
> R5
> ethernet interface.
>
> Ping traffic from behind R3 should be load balance between R2 and the
> tunnel
> according to the solution. However, since R2 is prunning the group, the
> traffic only goes through the tunnel.
>
> How to resolve this to enable load balance?
>
> Thanks.
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Sep 01 2007 - 11:32:12 ART