<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Question about Multicast-routing Tunnel interface behavior in Routing and SD-WAN</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/question-about-multicast-routing-tunnel-interface-behavior/m-p/4809128#M381753</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;You are very welcome&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://community.cisco.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/1399479"&gt;@Suzukikoki&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;and thanks for the feedback&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Apr 2023 23:09:38 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Harold Ritter</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2023-04-05T23:09:38Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Question about Multicast-routing Tunnel interface behavior</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/question-about-multicast-routing-tunnel-interface-behavior/m-p/4807053#M381599</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;The following settings are made so that interface Loopback0 can forward multicast packets.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;PRE&gt;interface Loopback0&lt;BR /&gt;ip address X.X.X.X X.X.X.X&lt;BR /&gt;ip mtu 1500&lt;BR /&gt;ip pim query-interval 2&lt;BR /&gt;ip pim sparse-mode&lt;/PRE&gt;
&lt;P&gt;This setting automatically creates a tunnel interface, but when we actually checked the status of the tunnel interface, we found that traffic was not being forwarded.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;PRE&gt;#show interface Tunnel0&lt;BR /&gt;Tunnel0 is up, line protocol is up&lt;BR /&gt;Hardware is Tunnel&lt;BR /&gt;Description: Pim Register Tunnel (Encap) for RP X.X.X.X&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;------omission&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;5 minute input rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec&lt;BR /&gt;5 minute output rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec&lt;BR /&gt;0 packets input, 0 bytes, 0 no buffer&lt;BR /&gt;Received 0 broadcasts (0 IP multicasts)&lt;BR /&gt;0 runts, 0 giants, 0 throttles&lt;BR /&gt;0 input errors, 0 CRC, 0 frame, 0 overrun, 0 ignored, 0 abort&lt;BR /&gt;0 packets output, 0 bytes, 0 underruns&lt;BR /&gt;Output 0 broadcasts (0 IP multicasts)&lt;BR /&gt;0 output errors, 0 collisions, 0 interface resets&lt;BR /&gt;0 unknown protocol drops&lt;BR /&gt;0 output buffer failures, 0 output buffers swapped out&lt;/PRE&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Am I correct in understanding that the Tunnel interface only encapsulates the PIM registers and does not actually forward traffic, resulting in this value?&lt;BR /&gt;Also, is my understanding correct that the interface that actually forwards traffic is not the Tunnel interface, but theinterface with&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;PRE&gt;ip pim sparse-mode&lt;/PRE&gt;
&lt;P&gt;set?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Apr 2023 06:02:56 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/question-about-multicast-routing-tunnel-interface-behavior/m-p/4807053#M381599</guid>
      <dc:creator>Suzukikoki</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-04-07T06:02:56Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Question about Multicast-routing Tunnel interface behavior</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/question-about-multicast-routing-tunnel-interface-behavior/m-p/4807785#M381633</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://community.cisco.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/1399479"&gt;@Suzukikoki&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;This tunnel is indeed used to encapsulate the PIM register messages between the first hop router (multicast router connected to the source) and the RP. The first PIM register message also carries the use data (actual multicast message sent by the source). The following PIM register messages are empty and are used to refresh the (S,G) state on the RP. It looks like the tunnel interface counter (packets output) is incremented only for the first PIM register message and not for the following empty PIM register messages.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Regards,&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Apr 2023 17:14:25 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/question-about-multicast-routing-tunnel-interface-behavior/m-p/4807785#M381633</guid>
      <dc:creator>Harold Ritter</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-04-04T17:14:25Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Question about Multicast-routing Tunnel interface behavior</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/question-about-multicast-routing-tunnel-interface-behavior/m-p/4808263#M381682</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi &lt;a href="https://community.cisco.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/326042"&gt;@Harold Ritter&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thank you for your detailed explanation.&lt;BR /&gt;I think I understand.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;In other words, am I correct in assuming that the counter value of this auto-generated interface will not be increased?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Apr 2023 07:11:50 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/question-about-multicast-routing-tunnel-interface-behavior/m-p/4808263#M381682</guid>
      <dc:creator>Suzukikoki</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-04-05T07:11:50Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Question about Multicast-routing Tunnel interface behavior</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/question-about-multicast-routing-tunnel-interface-behavior/m-p/4808793#M381708</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://community.cisco.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/1399479"&gt;@Suzukikoki&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;As I mentioned in my previous post, the&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;PRE&gt;packets output&lt;/PRE&gt;
&lt;P&gt;counter should be incremented for the first packet PIM register messages for a given stream that also contains user data. From what I have seen, it will not be incremented for the following PIM register messages (null registers), which do not contain user data.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Regards,&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Apr 2023 06:08:12 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/question-about-multicast-routing-tunnel-interface-behavior/m-p/4808793#M381708</guid>
      <dc:creator>Harold Ritter</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-04-07T06:08:12Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Question about Multicast-routing Tunnel interface behavior</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/question-about-multicast-routing-tunnel-interface-behavior/m-p/4809127#M381752</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Thank you very much for your response.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Understood!&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Apr 2023 23:08:11 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/question-about-multicast-routing-tunnel-interface-behavior/m-p/4809127#M381752</guid>
      <dc:creator>Suzukikoki</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-04-05T23:08:11Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Question about Multicast-routing Tunnel interface behavior</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/question-about-multicast-routing-tunnel-interface-behavior/m-p/4809128#M381753</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;You are very welcome&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://community.cisco.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/1399479"&gt;@Suzukikoki&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;and thanks for the feedback&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Apr 2023 23:09:38 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/question-about-multicast-routing-tunnel-interface-behavior/m-p/4809128#M381753</guid>
      <dc:creator>Harold Ritter</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-04-05T23:09:38Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

