All things related to multicast

[Greg Shepherd <>]

On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, John Zwiebel wrote:

> I agree with you shep.  Except now you assume the network was
>  planned thoroughly and you leave no room for easily changing
>  things.

Sure, but if you have to re-number in a way that forces you to change your
RP address, your problems are much bigger than your multicast config. ;-)

Greg

> YAHOO.  The folks on this list have to make their own choices.
>  Each of the options outlined have pluses and minuses.
>
> The "best" option is still SSM.  ;-)  (I know you agree with that.)
>
> On 9/4/02 2:44 PM, "Greg Shepherd" 
> <>
>  wrote:
>
> >
> >> Small enterprises, with few routers may find static RP the right way.
> >>
> >> Any enterprise larger than 20 routers, will want to use either
> >>  the BSR or auto-RP to provide management.  And if they are growing
> >>  and getting reconfigured often, then again, BSR or auto-RP
> >
> > I disagree. Having MORE routers releying on BSR or Auto-RP sounds MUCH
> > worse than having only a few.. Setting aside a pool of /32s used for
> > RouterIDs is just part of good network design. Pick one
> > of them as your RP address and it should NEVER need to change. Sure, it
> > may move to a different router, but the /32 RP address stays the same.
> > Then setting static RP mapping for this /32 into every router is no more
> > work than setting-up and other RP mapping mechanism. AND the extreme
> > reduction in trouble-shooting time down the road will be greatly
> > appreciated.
> >
> > Think 'reduction in complexity' and sleep well. ;-)
> >
> > Greg
> >
> >
>
>