Cisco Support Community
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Welcome to Cisco Support Community. We would love to have your feedback.

For an introduction to the new site, click here. If you'd prefer to explore, try our test area to get started. And see here for current known issues.

New Member

Problem with Cisco 3500XL switches for multicast

I'm troubleshooting a network consists of 4506, 3500XL and 2950 switches. 4506 is the core switch. Only one single vlan in the whole network. Everything is fine until we try to use Ghost in multicast mode to build some Windows PCs.

At the bengining, all the PCs connected with 4506 and 2950 can be ghosted fine. The whole ghost process only lasts for 15 mins. But PCs connected with any 3500XL (incl. 3508, 3524 and 3548) can't be ghosted. The speed is so slow that it shows "999hs left...". And after being like that for a few mins, the clients just drop out of Ghost precess.

I checked and found 3500XL series only support CGMP instead of IGMP. While the SupervisorII Engine (WS-X4013) on 4506 does not support CGMP server functionality or PIM protocol for multicast routing. So the SupervisorII is upgraded to SupercisorII+ (WS-X4013) which should solve this problem.

But when I tested the Ghost again, it appears to be working in the first place. The PCs connected to 3500XL can also be initiated for ghosting. Although the ghosting speed is only half of the that of the PCs connected to 2950, the ghosting can still be done in an hour.

But then comes the problem, the ghosting speed just keeps slowing down for the PCs with 3500XL, until half of them drop out of Ghost precess again.

Does anyone have any idea of the reason and solution? By the way, the ghosting software is actually called Powercast or something like that, not Norton or Symantec Ghost.


Re: Problem with Cisco 3500XL switches for multicast

Check that the 3500 switches are running something like 12.0(5)WC12 or later.

Then configure IP multicast routing like described in:

Best is to configure PIM-dense mode. I configured this recently for a similar network and it works fine.