Re: ip mroute considered a static route?

What's wrong with option 4, that it's not on the blueprint doesn't mean you
can't use it?

On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 2:11 PM, Scott Morris <smorris_at_ine.com> wrote:

> Well... Consider what your options are. In case you have an RPF
> failure...
>
> 1. Pick interfaces that don't cause an RPF failure (possible, but not
> always within the parameters of your lab, they may require specific
> interfaces)
> 2. Use static mroute (hence our discussion, may not be allowed)
> 3. Go change your IGP to avoid RPF failure (NOT recommended as you
> already have your IGP points. Be VERY careful if going down this path)
> 4. Use MBGP's ipv4 multicast address-family (Not part of the v3
> blueprint, but entirely possible in v4)
>
> But just like Joe said, an "ip mroute" has NOTHING to do with static
> routing. If I were told no, I would carefully consider #1 and #3 above
> and then go challenge the proctor. (Nicely, of course)
>
> HTH,
>
>
>
>
> *Scott Morris*, CCIE/x4/ (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider) #4713,
>
> JNCIE-M #153, JNCIS-ER, CISSP, et al.
>
> JNCI-M, JNCI-ER
>
> evil_at_ine.com
>
>
> Internetwork Expert, Inc.
>
> http://www.InternetworkExpert.com
>
> Toll Free: 877-224-8987
>
> Outside US: 775-826-4344
>
>
> Knowledge is power.
>
> Power corrupts.
>
> Study hard and be Eeeeviiiil......
>
>
>
>
>
> ALL From_NJ wrote:
> > Interesting Joe ...
> >
> > Can we infer then, that if we need to use a static mroute, that our
> routing
> > is not correct / taking the wrong paths? Kind of sounds that way ... I
> > suppose a trip to the proctor is in order.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 12:22 AM, Joe Astorino <jastorino_at_ipexpert.com
> >wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Hey Martin,
> >>
> >> A static mroute is NOT a static route. They are two completely and
> utterly
> >> different things that look the same. With that being said, as far as I
> am
> >> aware the proctors have now banned the use of static mroute specifically
> so
> >> you will probably not be able to use them. IF I was in a situation
> where
> >> it
> >> was not forbidden, I would double check with the proctor.
> >>
> >> On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 12:15 AM, Martin Hogan
> >> <martin.john.hogan_at_gmail.com>wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> If you were in a lab situation and were given the rule that you aren't
> >>> allowed to use static routes, yet you had an RPF issue which you could
> >>> easiest resolve with ip mroute blah, would you consider that breaching
> >>>
> >> the
> >>
> >>> rule? Why? Why not?
> >>>
> >>> This is prompted by me doing IGP manipulation in order to resolve,
> >>>
> >> where-as
> >>
> >>> the solution guide just did the ip mroute.
> >>>
> >>> Apologies if this has been covered extensively in the past and im
> >>>
> >> rehashing
> >>
> >>> it however I was unable to find it in the archive. Hopefully im better
> at
> >>> browsing the Cisco docs :)
> >>>
> >>> Cheers for the thoughts.
> >>>
> >>> Martin
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________________________________
> >>> Subscription information may be found at:
> >>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >> --
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Joe Astorino - CCIE #24347 R&S
> >> Technical Instructor - IPexpert, Inc.
> >> Cell: +1.586.212.6107
> >> Fax: +1.810.454.0130
> >> Mailto: jastorino_at_ipexpert.com
> >>
> >>
> >> 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
Received on Fri Sep 04 2009 - 14:23:07 ART