ip pim autorp listener

[james.mirtsis]

Hi I have a network that consists of 4 RP's and 4 Leaf routers. The main issue I am seeing which is one of the RP's is the following log message

Feb  3 05:57:47.409 UTC: %PIM-1-INVALID_RP_REG: Received Register from router 10.96.45.117 for group 224.0.1.41, 10.96.40.13 not willing to be RP

there is one of these for each of the 4 Leaf routers, and they are filling up the logs on this RP with useless information.

On the Leaf routers the interfaces are configured for PIM sparse mode and the routers have the "ip pim autorp listener" configured. I am wondering if this command should only be set on the RP's and not the Leaf routers?

Cisco says....

Error Message   

%PIM-1-INVALID_RP_REG: Received Register from [int] for [int], not

willing to be RP.

Explanation   A PIM router received a register message from another PIM router that identifies itself as the rendezvous point. If the router is not configured for another rendezvous point, it will not accept the register message.

Recommended Action   Configure all leaf routers (first-hop routers to multicast sources) with the IP address of the valid rendezvous point.

But this seems like a backward step to manually configure 4 RP's instead of using auto RP. Should the "ip pim autorp listener" be removed from the Leaf routers?

[Giuseppe Larosa]

Hello James,

on the leaf router use

show ip pim rp mapping

to verify to what RP the router should send the register message for the group.

the mapping agent is configured I suppose, and it should be able to take in account if each candidate RP is a candidate only for a subset of multicast addresses

verify if there is consistency on the mapping information with what is configured on the candidate RPs

Have you configured ACLs to limit to what groups a candidate RP will accept the role?

the command that you have mentioned should be just enough to allow autoRP messages to 224.0.1.39 and 224.0.1.40 to travel on a PIM SM network instead of using pim sparse-dense-mode.

if you remove the command and you stay in PIM SM mode, autoRP will not work as the routers will look for the RP for the above groups and they will not find them.

Hope to help

Giuseppe

[james.mirtsis]

Hi Giuseppe,

                   Thanks for your response. Yes there were ACLs configured. The problem was I never configured it originally and the logs were getting filled up with failed RP reg messages. I found the problem this morning. Looking further into the config, all 4 tree routers were configured to advertise messages for multicast address 224.0.1.41 but none were conffigured to take on the role of RP. So I will be modifying the config to match this so the logs clear up.

James 

[amexamexin]

Hi Giuseppe,

Can you please advice, i am faceing same problem but the condition is, i donnt want any other group to use my RP apart from the range i have defined in ACL.

Rajeev