From: Bill Eyer (beyer@optonline.net)
Date: Tue Sep 09 2008 - 06:45:42 ART
Mike,
I forget the exact version of code that this changed, but yes it's true
you do have to configure the address on the RP itself now. You did not
in earlier versions, so earlier references like, I believe, the Cisco
Press books say you do not have to, but later materials will tell you
that you do.
Sincerely,
Bill
Michael Permoda wrote:
> All,
>
> I know this is an old topic but I have been seeing different opinions from
> different vendors. When configuring sparse mode only and using static RPs do
> we have to configure the ip pim rp-address on the RP itself or no? From my own
> experience it is good practice do configure it and I am actually testing it
> right now and it doesn't work without it. I get "Received Register from
> router 129.1.46.6 for group 232.32.32.32, 150.1.0.255 not willing to be RP".
> After I configure the ip pim rp-address command on the RP, all works. However,
> I have gotten feedback from Cisco that it is not needed. Could anyone clarify
> this please? Thanks, Mike P.
> _________________________________________________________________
> Want to do more with Windows Live? Learn 10 hidden secrets from Jamie.
> http://windowslive.com/connect/post/jamiethomson.spaces.live.com-Blog-cns!550
> F681DAD532637!5295.entry?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_domore_092008
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Oct 04 2008 - 09:26:17 ART