From: Toh Soon, Lim (tohsoon28@gmail.com)
Date: Sun Oct 07 2007 - 04:22:29 ART
Hi Group,
I have the following static RP entry on router R9:
!
ip pim rp-address 200.0.0.2 4 override
!
access-list 4 permit 239.0.0.0 0.0.0.255
!
interface FastEthernet0/0
ip igmp join-group 239.1.1.1
!
The RP for the group 239.0.0.0/8 is R2 (200.0.0.2) which is few hops away.
PIM SD mode is enabled on all physical interfaces on all routers because I'm
also running Auto-RP for other groups. All PIM neighbor adjacencies verified
up.
Kindly see outputs below:
R9#sh ip pim rp map in-use
PIM Group-to-RP Mappings
Group(s) 224.11.11.11/32
RP 200.0.0.1 (?), v2v1
Info source: 200.0.0.2 (?), elected via Auto-RP
Uptime: 02:27:21, expires: 00:02:34
Group(s) 224.11.11.12/32
RP 200.0.0.1 (?), v2v1
Info source: 200.0.0.2 (?), elected via Auto-RP
Uptime: 02:27:21, expires: 00:02:33
Group(s) 224.11.11.13/32
RP 200.0.0.1 (?), v2v1
Info source: 200.0.0.2 (?), elected via Auto-RP
Uptime: 02:27:21, expires: 00:02:31
Acl: 4, Static-Override
RP: 200.0.0.2 (?)
Dynamic (Auto-RP or BSR) RPs in cache that are in use:
R9#sh ip pim rp-hash 239.1.1.1
No RP available for this group
R9#sh ip mr 239.1.1.1
(*, 239.1.1.1), 00:13:09/00:02:01, RP 0.0.0.0, flags: DCL
Incoming interface: Null, RPF nbr 0.0.0.0
Outgoing interface list:
FastEthernet0/0, Forward/Sparse-Dense, 00:13:09/00:00:00
Multilink1, Forward/Sparse-Dense, 00:13:09/00:00:00
Why doing "rp-hash" for group 239.1.1.1 does not return the RP? I'm
expecting it to return the RP 200.0.0.2.
The (*, 239.1.1.1) multicast entry doesn't seem okay. The RP is 0.0.0.0.
Secondly, when configuring static RP, should I configure the same static RP
entry on all intermediate routers leading to the RP? I think so I should.
Understand that a router, having a member joining the group, will multicast
a Join/Prune message hop by hop to the RP. So each intermediate PIM router
should have knowledge of the static RP in order to send its own Join/Prune
message toward the RP.
Please advise.
Thank you.
B.Rgds,
Lim TS
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Nov 16 2007 - 13:11:12 ART