From: Wollmann, Bruno RQHR (Bruno.Wollmann@rqhealth.ca)
Date: Wed Nov 14 2007 - 17:54:57 ART
I have tried 225.1.1.1 and 232.1.1.1. I have tried this on physical and
vlan ports.
When I DEBUG IP IGMP on r3, I see the igmp group report when I first
enter the IP IGMP JOIN-GROUP command on the switch.
*Nov 14 20:51:04.623: IGMP(0): Received v2 Report on FastEthernet0/0
from 10.1.37.7 for 224.1.1.1
*Nov 14 20:51:04.623: IGMP(0): Received Group record for group
224.1.1.1, mode 2 from 10.1.37.7 for 0 sources
This is the only time I see these messages in the debugs. When r3
starts sending IGMP queries for 224.1.1.1, sw1 doesn't respond but r5
does. I then removed r5 from the group and sw1 still doesn't respond to
these queries and after 3 minutes 224.1.1.1 is no longer in r3's MROUTE
table.
Thanks
Bruno
*********************************************************
Here is the full debug and a copy of r3's MROUTE table...
*********************************************************
*Nov 14 20:51:04.623: IGMP(0): Received v2 Report on FastEthernet0/0
from 10.1.37.7 for 224.1.1.1
*Nov 14 20:51:04.623: IGMP(0): Received Group record for group
224.1.1.1, mode 2 from 10.1.37.7 for 0 sources
*Nov 14 20:51:04.623: IGMP(0): WAVL Insert group: 224.1.1.1 interface:
FastEthernet0/0Successful
*Nov 14 20:51:04.623: IGMP(0): Switching to EXCLUDE mode for 224.1.1.1
on FastEthernet0/0
*Nov 14 20:51:04.623: IGMP(0): Updating EXCLUDE group timer for
224.1.1.1
*Nov 14 20:51:04.623: IGMP(0): MRT Add/Update FastEthernet0/0 for
(*,224.1.1.1) by 0
r3#sh ip mroute 224.1.1.1
IP Multicast Routing Table
Flags: D - Dense, S - Sparse, B - Bidir Group, s - SSM Group, C -
Connected,
L - Local, P - Pruned, R - RP-bit set, F - Register flag,
T - SPT-bit set, J - Join SPT, M - MSDP created entry,
X - Proxy Join Timer Running, A - Candidate for MSDP
Advertisement,
U - URD, I - Received Source Specific Host Report,
Z - Multicast Tunnel, z - MDT-data group sender,
Y - Joined MDT-data group, y - Sending to MDT-data group
Outgoing interface flags: H - Hardware switched, A - Assert winner
Timers: Uptime/Expires
Interface state: Interface, Next-Hop or VCD, State/Mode
(*, 224.1.1.1), 00:00:08/00:02:51, RP 0.0.0.0, flags: DC
Incoming interface: Null, RPF nbr 0.0.0.0
Outgoing interface list:
FastEthernet0/0, Forward/Dense, 00:00:08/00:00:00
Serial0/1/0, Forward/Dense, 00:00:08/00:00:00
*Nov 14 20:51:48.079: IGMP(0): Send v2 general Query on FastEthernet0/0
r3#
*Nov 14 20:52:48.079: IGMP(0): Send v2 general Query on FastEthernet0/0
r3#
*Nov 14 20:53:48.079: IGMP(0): Send v2 general Query on FastEthernet0/0
r3#
*Nov 14 20:53:58.079: IGMP(0): Received Leave from 0.0.0.0
(FastEthernet0/0) for 224.1.1.1
*Nov 14 20:53:58.079: IGMP(0): Received Group record for group
224.1.1.1, mode 3 from 0.0.0.0 for 0 sources
*Nov 14 20:53:58.079: IGMP(0): Lower expiration timer to 2000 msec for
224.1.1.1 on FastEthernet0/0
*Nov 14 20:53:58.079: IGMP(0): Send v2 Query on FastEthernet0/0 for
group 224.1.1.1
*Nov 14 20:53:59.079: IGMP(0): Send v2 Query on FastEthernet0/0 for
group 224.1.1.1
r3#
*Nov 14 20:54:00.079: IGMP(0): Switching to INCLUDE mode for 224.1.1.1
on FastEthernet0/0
*Nov 14 20:54:00.079: IGMP(0): MRT delete FastEthernet0/0 for
(*,224.1.1.1) by 0
r3#sh ip mroute 224.1.1.1
Group 224.1.1.1 not found
-----Original Message-----
From: David Prall [mailto:dcp@dcptech.com]
Sent: November 14, 2007 11:43 AM
To: Wollmann, Bruno RQHR; 'Gregory Gombas'
Cc: 'Cisco certification'
Subject: RE: Multicast on 3550/3560
Do you see any difference when you move to an address outside of the 224
address space. Use something like 225.1.1.1 instead. Are you putting the
address on a physical interface or vlan interface.
David
-- http://dcp.dcptech.com> -----Original Message----- > From: Wollmann, Bruno RQHR [mailto:Bruno.Wollmann@rqhealth.ca] > Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 12:10 PM > To: David Prall; Gregory Gombas > Cc: Cisco certification > Subject: RE: Multicast on 3550/3560 > > I just disabled IGMP SNOOPING and still no response. I sent a ping > from > sw1 to 224.1.1.1 and both the r5 and sw1 respond to this but sw1 will > still not respond when the ping is generated from one of my routers. > > I have decided to stop using the switches as test hosts for multicast > and will only use the routers. > > Thanks for your help > Bruno > > -----Original Message----- > From: David Prall [mailto:dcp@dcptech.com] > Sent: November 14, 2007 9:32 AM > To: Wollmann, Bruno RQHR; 'Gregory Gombas' > Cc: 'Cisco certification' > Subject: RE: Multicast on 3550/3560 > > Most likely IGMP Snooping killing it. Have you tried disabling IGMP > Snooping, or configuring an IGMP Querier to support IGMP Snooping > without an IGMP router. > > David > > -- > http://dcp.dcptech.com > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] > On Behalf > > Of Wollmann, Bruno RQHR > > Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 9:17 AM > > To: Gregory Gombas > > Cc: Cisco certification > > Subject: RE: Multicast on 3550/3560 > > > > Correct. IP IGMP JOIN-GROUP <group address> turns the > router into a > > multicast receiver/host which doesn't require multicast routing > > enabled on the router or PIM enabled on the interface. > It's just like > > > a PC that joins a multicast group. That PC doesn't have to route > > multicast packets, it just wants to receive them. > > > > I can't get the switches to behave the same way. > > > > Thanks > > Bruno > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] > On Behalf > > Of Gregory Gombas > > Sent: November 14, 2007 7:49 AM > > To: Wollmann, Bruno RQHR > > Cc: Cisco certification > > Subject: Re: Multicast on 3550/3560 > > > > I thought routers also needed PIM enabled in order to > enable multicast > > > processing on the interface. Are you saying that is not the > case? Is > > that documented somewhere? > > > > Thanks, > > Greg > > > > On Nov 13, 2007 11:44 PM, Wollmann, Bruno RQHR > > <Bruno.Wollmann@rqhealth.ca> wrote: > > > Hello GS, > > > > > > Has anyone other than me had trouble getting a 3550 or 3560 > > to reply > > > to pings after using the IP IGMP JOIN-GROUP command? My switches > > > won't reply to pings unless I enable multicast routing on > them and > > > enable PIM on the interface. My routers only need to join > > the group > > > to reply to pings. I don't have to enable multicast > routing or PIM. > > > > > > My setup is simple. OSPF is running on all 4 devices so > > that r1 knows > > > > > about the r3,r5,sw1 network and sw1 and r5 know about the r1,r3 > > network. > > > I started off with more complicated configs as I was > doing practice > > > labs and was having problems getting them to work. To help > > > troubleshoot, I simplified things. r1 and r3 are running > > PIM DENSE on > > their interfaces. > > > Even when I send a ping from r3, r5 is the only device to > > reply, sw1 > > > does not. > > > > > > r1----p2pserial----r3-------sw1 > > > |-----r5 > > > > > > Is this normal behaviour for the switches. I've read the > > doc cd and I > > > > > think my setup should work without having to enable > > multicast routing > > > on the switches. I've tried this with routed interfaces and svi > > > interfaces on the switches. What am I missing? > > > > > > > > > http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/lan/cat3560/12240se/sc > > > g/ > > > swmcast.htm > > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > > _ Subscription information may be found at: > > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html > > > > ______________________________________________________________ > > _________ > > Subscription information may be found at: > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html > > > > ______________________________________________________________ > > _________ > > Subscription information may be found at: > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Dec 01 2007 - 06:37:29 ART