From: Igor M. (imanassypov@rogers.com)
Date: Sun Aug 24 2008 - 14:00:19 ART
does this mean that autorp can not have reduntant rp setup?
----------------------
I.M., M.Eng. P.Eng.
Network Architect
CI Investments
----------------------
--- On Sun, 8/24/08, akyccie <akyccie@gmail.com> wrote:
From: akyccie <akyccie@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: BSR : Priorities
To: "GAURAV MADAN" <gauravmadan1177@gmail.com>
Cc: "Mujeeb Sarwar" <mujeebsarwar@gmail.com>, "Igor M." <imanassypov@rogers.com>, "Narbik Kocharians" <narbikk@gmail.com>, "Cisco certification" <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Received: Sunday, August 24, 2008, 12:29 PM
You are right, Only BSR has priority option
By default, the router with the highest interface IP address on a subnet
will be the PIM Designated Router highest IP on the subnet can be overridden
ip pim dr-priority X (default 1, higher preferred)
-aky
----- Original Message -----
From: "GAURAV MADAN" <gauravmadan1177@gmail.com>
To: "akyccie" <akyccie@gmail.com>
Cc: "Mujeeb Sarwar" <mujeebsarwar@gmail.com>; "Igor
M."
<imanassypov@rogers.com>; "Narbik Kocharians"
<narbikk@gmail.com>; "Cisco
certification" <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2008 9:52 PM
Subject: Re: BSR : Priorities
> AUTO-RP has no such option of priority
> Only BSR has this option
>
> Rack1R1(config)#ip pim rp-candidate s0/1/0 ?
> group-list group-list
> interval RP candidate advertisement interval
> priority RP candidate priority
> <cr>
>
> Rack1R1(config)#ip pim send-rp-announce s0/1/0 scope 10 ?
> group-list Group access-list
> interval RP announcement interval
> <cr>
>
> HTH
> Gaurav Madan
>
> On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 9:39 PM, akyccie <akyccie@gmail.com> wrote:
>> So it means in case of Auto-RP, priority command (as defined 80 and 90
in
>> below example) doesn't paly any role to decide the designate
>> Primary/backup
>> router. It will be decided on whoever is having the highest IP
address.
>>
>> I think you can also use "ip pim dr-priority" command in
interface
>> configuration mode to set the priority to router you wanted to be
>> elected
>> as the designated router (DR)
>>
>> -aky
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "GAURAV MADAN"
>> <gauravmadan1177@gmail.com>
>> To: "Mujeeb Sarwar" <mujeebsarwar@gmail.com>
>> Cc: "Igor M." <imanassypov@rogers.com>; "Narbik
Kocharians"
>> <narbikk@gmail.com>; "Cisco certification"
<ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>> Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2008 8:39 PM
>> Subject: Re: BSR : Priorities
>>
>>
>>> Yeah ,, Mujeeb is correct.
>>>
>>> If question doesnt permit to use any other interface to announce
the
>>> RP still we want a particular router to be elected .. AUTO-RP is
not
>>> the solution there .
>>>
>>> Yeah if in exam we are permitted to create addition loopback
>>> interfaces and assign IP address to those of our choice ....
AUTO-RP
>>> can be used .
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 7:30 PM, Mujeeb Sarwar
<mujeebsarwar@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> By using higher ip address for primary. Let say R1 having
loopback 1
>>>> with
>>>> ip address 10.10.10.10 and R2 having loopback 1 with ip
address
>>>> 1.1.1.1
>>>> so in this case R1 will be the primary and R2 will be backup.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Mujeeb
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 4:18 PM, Igor M.
<imanassypov@rogers.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> If you decided to go with Auto-RP, how would you designate
>>>>> primary/backup
>>>>> RP pair for a particular group if auto-rp does not carry
priority?
>>>>>
>>>>> ----------------------
>>>>> I.M., M.Eng. P.Eng.
>>>>> Network Architect
>>>>> CI Investments
>>>>> ----------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> --- On Sun, 8/24/08, Mujeeb Sarwar
<mujeebsarwar@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> From: Mujeeb Sarwar <mujeebsarwar@gmail.com>
>>>>> Subject: Re: BSR : Priorities
>>>>> To: "Narbik Kocharians"
<narbikk@gmail.com>
>>>>> Cc: "GAURAV MADAN"
<gauravmadan1177@gmail.com>, "Cisco certification"
>>>>> <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>>>>> Received: Sunday, August 24, 2008, 3:36 AM
>>>>>
>>>>> Even in Auto-RP you will get info for all possible RPs on
mapping
>>>>> agent,
>>>>> from which mapping agent will elect the RP and advertise
to other
>>>>> routers.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Mujeeb
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Aug 23, 2008 at 7:43 PM, Narbik Kocharians
>>>>> <narbikk@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> > Remember, unlike Auto-RP, with BSR, the BSR router
does not elect an
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > RP
>>>>>
>>>>> for
>>>>> > you, the BSR creates a list that includes all the RPs
(RP-Set) and
>>>>> that is
>>>>> > advertised to the other routers, and its the routers
that elect an
>>>>> > RP
>>>>> > and
>>>>> > NOT the BSR.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 6:43 AM, GAURAV MADAN
>>>>> <gauravmadan1177@gmail.com
>>>>>
>>>>> > >wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > > Any comments on this ?
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>>> > > From: GAURAV MADAN
<gauravmadan1177@gmail.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> > > Date: Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 9:04 PM
>>>>> > > Subject: BSR : Priorities
>>>>> > > To: Cisco certification
<ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>>>>> > >
>>>>>
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > HI All
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > My requirement says that R4 should be RP for
224.0.0.0/5 .. If R4
>>>>> > > fails .. R5 should assume role of RP .
>>>>>
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > I did it as follows :
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > Rack1R4(config)# ip pim rp-candidate loop 0
group-list 10 priority
>>>>> > > >
>>>>> > > > 80
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > Rack1R5(config)# ip pim rp-candidate
>>>>> loop 0 group-list 10 priority 90
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > At mapping agent .. I see the following :
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > Rack1R3#sh ip pim rp mapp
>>>>> > > PIM Group-to-RP Mappings
>>>>> > > This system is the Bootstrap Router (v2)
>>>>>
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > Group(s) 224.0.0.0/5
>>>>> > > RP 150.1.4.4 (?), v2
>>>>> > > Info source: 154.1.0.4 (?), via bootstrap,
priority 80, holdtime
>>>>>
>>>>> 150
>>>>> > > Uptime: 00:03:53, expires: 00:01:32
>>>>> > > RP 150.1.5.5 (?), v2
>>>>> > > Info source: 154.1.0.5 (?), via bootstrap,
priority 90, holdtime
>>>>>
>>>>> 150
>>>>> > > Uptime: 00:03:44, expires: 00:01:41
>>>>> > > Rack1R3#
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > Is it expected that I see both of candidate RPs
..
>>>>> > > My take is that one which is active is only
shown up .. Please
>>>>>
>>>>> correct
>>>>> > > me if I am wrong in my understanding .
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > Thnx
>>>>> > > Gaurav Madan.
>>>>> > >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > > Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > >
>>>>>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Sep 01 2008 - 08:15:32 ART