[pim] Re: PIM-SM over IPv6 support in cisco

[Patrick Grossetete <pgrosset at cisco.com>]

        Hi Varun,

        Several SSM commands for MLD were introduced on 12.4(2)T as documented in
http://wwwin-itg.cisco.com/ucdit/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios123/123cgcr/ipv6_r/ipv6_06g.htm#wp1940231

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/iosswrel/ps5187/products_configuration_guide_chapter09186a00801d6618.html#wp1290106

Regards
Patrick

At 05:07 PM 7/20/2006, varun srivastava wrote:
> Hi Stig/Nidhi,
> I sill doubt that cisco IOS 12.3(14T) has SSM support .
> As I'm unable to get equivalent command for
> ipv4 mld ssm-group enable
> for ipv6 mld.
> Regards
> Varun
>
> On 7/19/06, Stig Venaas <stig.venaas at uninett.no> wrote:
> > varun srivastava wrote:
> > > Hi ,
> > > Please answer query asked by me in following mail. It is urgent
> > .
> >
> > I'm on vacation and should probably do other things. I don't know
> > why
> > this is so urgent, I've got lots of mails from you on this issue
> > now...
> >
> > Anyway, it appears you are using a link-local group, in which case
> > it's
> > correct for the cisco to ignore the join.
> >
> > Stig
> >
> > > Regards
> > > Varun
> > >
> > > On 7/17/06, varun srivastava <varun.maillistid at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi ,
> > >>  I have one cisco specific query. In cisco 7200 IOS
> > 12.3(14T)
> > >> Topology src-a ------ rtr-a ------ cisco ------- rtb-b
> > >> if I'm sending ipv4 (S[src-a],G) join from rtr-b to cisco 
> > then it
> > >> creates a (S,G) state and send a (S,G)  join to rtr-a, but
> > if I'm doing
> > >> same thing over ipv6 cisco accepts the packet but doesn't send
> > and
> > >> create (S,G) join to rta-a ... does cisco mentioned above have
> > full
> > >> support for (S,G) ?
> > >>  debug messages after receiving Join (S,G) packets are as
> > follows.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> 15:05:05: IPv6 PIM: Received J/P on FastEthernet3/0 from
> > FE80:1::10
> > >> target: FE80:1::20 (to us)
> > >> 15:05:05: IPv6 PIM: J/P entry: Join root: 2FFE:2:0:1::1
> > group:
> > >> FF02:1::2 flags:  S
> > >> 15:05:08: %LINEPROTO-5-UPDOWN: Line protocol on Interface
> > Tunnel2,
> > >> changed state to up
> > >> 15:05:08: IPv6 PIM: Interface Tunnel2 is marked passive, not
> > enabled
> > >> 15:05:08: IPv6 PIM: Interface Tunnel2 changed state to up
> > >> 15:05:08: IPv6 PIM: Interface Tunnel2 is marked passive,
> > not
> > >> enabledConnection closed by foreign host.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Regards
> > >> varun
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On 7/11/06, Stig Venaas <stig.venaas at uninett.no>
> > wrote:
> > >> > varun srivastava wrote:
> > >> > > Hi Nidhi,
> > >> > > I don't want to use any IGP . So in absence of IGP
> > what are the
> > >> options
> > >> > > left ?
> > >> >
> > >> > Point is that router-b must do RPF on the BSR address in
> > the BSM, so
> > >> > router-b needs a route for the global address used as BSR
> > address.
> > >> >
> > >> > If you have global addresses on link between router-a and
> > router-b,
> > >> then
> > >> > you should be ok (e.g. you use a /64 prefix for the link,
> > and then by
> > >> > configuring the interfaces, router-b will have a route for
> > router-a's
> > >> > address, they are both in the same /64).
> > >> >
> > >> > You might also add a static route on router-b, but the sane
> > thing
> > >> (IMO),
> > >> > is to just do what I said above.
> > >> >
> > >> > Stig
> > >> >
> > >> > > My basic questions is :- if I am already advertsing
> > relationship
> > >> > > between router-a link local address and router-a
> > global address in
> > >> > > hello message then why an extra route entry [either
> > thru IGP or
> > >> static
> > >> > > route] is needed to ask router to fwd router-a global
> > address packets
> > >> > > to router-a link local address?
> > >> > > --
> > >> > > varun
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On 7/11/06, Nidhi Bhaskar <nbhaskar at cisco.com>
> > wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > >> > Hi,
> > >> > >> > I have following queries regarding using
> > PIM-SM over IPv6.
> > >> > >> > consider the following topology
> > >> > >> >
> > >> > >> >
> > <router-a>BSR/RP------------<router-b>----------<host-b>
> > >> > >> >
> > >> > >> > 1) In PIM BSR message from router-a I keep
> > source address as link
> > >> > >> > local ipv6 address in ipv6 header, and I'm
> > using one global ipv6
> > >> > >> > address to advertise as BSR address (as link
> > local scope can
> > >> not be
> > >> > >> > advertised as global BSR). is this is correct
> > ?
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> That is correct.
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> > 2) In this case I think we need to advertise
> > global ipv6
> > >> address of
> > >> > >> > router-a in Hello message under option type
> > 24. Now I think this
> > >> > >> > advertising of global ipv6 address as
> > secondary address for the
> > >> link
> > >> > >> > local address should be enough. But when I'm
> > sending Join/Prune
> > >> > >> > packets from host-b to router-b with RP
> > address as global ipv6
> > >> address
> > >> > >> > of router-a then router-b is failing
> > RPF  check as it is not
> > >> getting
> > >> > >> > any link for global ipv6 address of router-a.
> > Can you suggest what
> > >> > >> > extra should be done ?
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> That is odd. What IGP are you running ? You
> > shouldn't RPF fail on
> > >> > >> router-b for a directly connected IPv6 address. I
> > suspect something
> > >> > >> may be broken in unicast routing. Make sure the
> > interface on
> > >> which you
> > >> > >> have the global RP address configured is also
> > enabled for your v6
> > >> > >> unicast routng protocol.
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> Nidhi.
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> > Note: router-b is cisco 7200 and if I
> > explicitly add static
> > >> route for
> > >> > >> > router-a global ipv6 address then every thing
> > works fine , so I
> > >> guess
> > >> > >> > problem is dynamic mapping of secondary
> > global address to primary
> > >> link
> > >> > >> > local address of router-a.
> > >> > >> >
> > >> > >> > waiting for early help
> > >> > >> > Regards
> > >> > >> > Varun
> > >> > >> >
> > >> > >> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > >> > >> > pim mailing list
> > >> > >> > pim at ietf.org
> > >> > >> >
> >
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim
> > >> > >> >
> > >> > >> >
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >
> > >> > > _______________________________________________
> > >> > > pim mailing list
> > >> > > pim at ietf.org
> > >> > >
> >
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > pim mailing list
> > > pim at ietf.org
> > >
> >
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim

_______________________________________________
pim mailing list
pim at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim