Re: Auto RP with sparse-mode and no dm-fallback..and its

What i dont understand is how come we are enabling only sparse and yet we can
see the maping on all the routers...why use BSR then

if you see my topology
> f0/0--R1----LAN-----R2-----FR-----R3---LAN---R5

R5 & R3 gets the update

R3
====
*Mar 1 00:35:31.615: Auto-RP(0): Received RP-discovery, from 10.10.10.10,
RP_cnt 1, ht 181
*Mar 1 00:35:31.619: Auto-RP(0): Update (224.11.11.11/32, RP:10.10.10.10),
PIMv2 v1

R5
====
*Mar 1 00:36:16.155: IP(0): s=10.10.10.10 (FastEthernet0/0) d=224.0.1.40
id=547, ttl=8, prot=17, len=62(48), mroute olist null
*Mar 1 00:36:16.159: Auto-RP(0): Received RP-discovery, from 10.10.10.10,
RP_cnt 1, ht 181
*Mar 1 00:36:16.159: Auto-RP(0): Added with (224.11.11.11/32,
RP:10.10.10.10), PIMv2 v1ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 2.2.2.1

R5#sh ip pim
*Mar 1 00:36:27.787: %SYS-5-CONFIG_I: Configured from console by console rp
map
PIM Group-to-RP Mappings

Group(s) 224.11.11.11/32
  RP 10.10.10.10 (?), v2v1
    Info source: 10.10.10.10 (?), elected via Auto-RP
         Uptime: 00:00:14, expires: 00:02:42
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Mark Matters
  To: Keegan.Holley_at_sungard.com
  Cc: G2 ; Cisco certification ; Mohamed El Henawy ; nobody_at_groupstudy.com
  Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 3:06 PM
  Subject: Re: Auto RP with sparse-mode and no dm-fallback..and its working

  AutoRP with sparse-mode needs the autorp listener command because it was
designed to work with sparse-dense mode.

  no dm fallback would be used if you are using sparse-dense mode and wanted
to prevent failing over to dense mode if the RP failed.

  Now even with spare-mode the first few packets will be sent in DENSE mode to
set up the autorp then after that they will all be sparse-mode.

  On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 12:03 AM, <Keegan.Holley_at_sungard.com> wrote:

    auto-rp works without the configuring dense mode. The point of it is to
    allow sparse mode multicast so the routers just listen and flood the 1.39
    and 1.40 groups regardless of whether sparse-dense is configured or not.
    Not sure what you meant by the acl can you elaborate? Like an acl
    blocking the two multicast groups from being accepted via an interface or
    an acl on the rp to prevent a certain group mapping?

    Re: Auto RP with sparse-mode and no dm-fallback..and its working

    G2
    to:
    Mohamed El Henawy
    08/25/09 05:37 PM

    Sent by:
    nobody_at_groupstudy.com
    Cc:
    Cisco certification
    Please respond to G2

    Mohamed,

    Take a look at this:

    http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_3t/12_3t4/feature/guide/gtautorp.h
tml

    On Aug 25, 2009, at 11:20 PM, Mohamed El Henawy wrote:

> Hello Nathan ,
>
> we put the no dm fallback when we use sparse mode ...as per Cisco ..
>
> Benefits of Auto-RP in a PIM Network , step 14
>
    http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/ipmulti/configuration/guide/imc_basic
_cfg_ps6350_TSD_Products_Configuration_Guide_Chapter.html

>
> my problem that I have done everything to prevent R3 to know the
> mapping but yet I find that R3 knows the mapping
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nathan Richie" <nathanr_at_boice.net>
> To: "Mohamed El Henawy" <m.henawy_at_link.net>; "Cisco certification"
    <ccielab_at_groupstudy.com
> >
> Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 12:12 AM
> Subject: RE: Auto RP with sparse-mode and no dm-fallback..and its
> working
>
>
> Using "no ip pim dm-fallback" would not have any bearing since you
> are using sparse mode (you would need sparse-dense mode for this
> command to have an effect).
>
> Have you configured the "ip pim autorp-listener" command? Also
> which router is your mapping agent?
>
> ________________________________________
> From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com [nobody_at_groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> Mohamed El Henawy [m.henawy_at_link.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2009 4:09 PM
> To: Cisco certification
> Subject: Auto RP with sparse-mode and no dm-fallback..and its working
>
> Hello Group ,
>
> this might be a silly question but...still I wish to learn
> how :) ..I'm tired
> of multicast really
>
> I have this setup
>
> f0/0--R1----LAN-----R2-----FR-----R3---LAN---R5
>
>
> - I have put ip pim sparse mode on the interfaces
> - configured auto rp on R2 with specific ACL
> -put no ip pim dm-fallback on R2 & R3
> -Join the group I permitted with the ACL on R1 F0/0
>
> my question is ....how come ( without any pings from R3 ) I see the
> rp mapping
> on R3 & R5 ? if I'm blocking the 39 & 40 groups as I'm using ACL
> with the RP (
> correct ? ) and I'm putting no ip pim dm-fallback
>
>
> where is the trick ?
>
> Thanks....
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
>
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
>
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.66/2325 - Release Date:
> 08/25/09 06:08:00
>
>
> 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

    _______________________________________________________________________
    Subscription information may be found at:
    http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html

    Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net

    _______________________________________________________________________
    Subscription information may be found at:
    http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html

  --

  -
  "The more I learn the less I know". This is incredibly frustrating to me.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-

  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
  Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.67/2326 - Release Date: 08/25/09
18:07:00

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Wed Aug 26 2009 - 15:50:00 ART