[Xorp-users] A sample config.boot for linux to test pim part of xorp.

[Philippe Van Hecke]

Le Monday 07 June 2004 18:38, Pavlin Radoslavov a écrit :
> Can you verify by running "netstat -rn" that the Juniper router is
> indeed the next-hop router toward those source addresses. For,
> example, if the next-hop router is connected to, say, eth0 which is
> not enabled for multicast routing then this is one possible reason
> for the warning. Also, if "netstat -rn" indeed shows that the
> Juniper router is the next-hop router, then can you use the
> "show pim mrib" xorpsh operational command to verify whether PIM-SM
> itself has learned about that route. Finally, you may want to look
> into the "show pim join" output to check the (S,G) multicast routing
> state.

Pavlin,
My mistake, when i say that the next-hop 193.191.130.193 should be
the juniper router i talk on the multicast point of view. So you right
my default unicast route is through the eth0 as i want that unicast and 
multicast traffic travel through different interface. As i have say in 
previous post, the box acting as firewall. I want to disociate traffic on
different interface because the firewall is on the same subnet as others
BELNET server. And i doesn't want that multicast traffic pollute statistic of 
unicast traffic of the servers (we are not able to use IGMP snooping on the 
switch)

So there is a possibility to have on linux, different table for unicast and 
multicast routing. What i mean here is there is a way to let multicast use
other routing table to make RPF ? Does XORP permit this ?

Also , i doen't know if this is the best way or if this is needed or if it is 
completely silly do make this.

echo 0 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/all/rp_filter

Thanks a lot for your help.

Philippe.

__________________________________________________________________
Philippe Van Hecke - BELNET, The Belgian Research Network
"In a world without walls or fences, who needs Windows and Gates?"
__________________________________________________________________