RV042 not annoucing vpn routes over rip v2

Question

Problem: RV042 is not announcing a class C VPN route via RIP to other routers. It announces the gateway public address via rip, but not the VPN route.
I am attempting to use a pair of RV042 as a redundant links between our home office and a branch. The home office and branch is already connected via a T1. Each location also has an additional cable internet connection with public IP address and a cisco 1921 router controlling the traffic.
The 1921 routers are using OSPF to route traffic over the T1 and have RIPv2 enabled to talk to their local respective RV042s. Here is a description of how the network is set up.
MainRouter - cisco 1921
   Eth0 - Network is 192.168.41.0/24
             IP address is 192.168.41.20
   Eth0/1 - Network 10.1.1.1 255.255.255.254
            T1 connection to branch router
MainRV - RV042 v3 with fw 4.2.1.02
   Wan1 - Public IP A X.X.X.X
    LAN- Network 192.168.41.0/24
              IP 192.168.41.11 255.255.255.0
BranchRouter - cisco 1921
  Eth0/0 - Network is 192.168.46.0/24
               IP address is 192.168.46.10
  Eth0/1 - Network 10.1.1.2 255.255.255.254
            T1 connection to main router
BranchRV - RV042 v3 with fw 4.2.1.02
  Wan1 - Public IP B Y.Y.Y.Y
    LAN - Network 192.168.46.0/24
              IP 192.168.46.11 255.255.255.0
I have established a VPN from BranchRV to MainRV and it passes traffic correctly. My "MainRouter "
rip database looks like this....
192.168.41.0/24    auto-summary
192.168.41.0/24    directly connected, GigabitEthernet0/0
X.X.X.X/24    auto-summary
X.X.X.Z/30
    [1] via 192.168.46.11, 00:00:01, GigabitEthernet0/0
Notice that there is no route to 192.168.46.0/24 in there....
Now here is the kicker, just messing around, I changed the VPN settings to use subnets 10.0.10.0/24 on MainRV and 10.0.11.0/24 on BranchRV instead of 192.168.41.0/24 and 192.168.46.0/24 respectivly. After I tried that the routes for the 10.0.3.0 were announced via RIP
Here is what the MainRouter's rip database looked like after I tried that
10.0.0.0/8    auto-summary
10.0.11.0/24
    [2] via 192.168.41.11, 00:00:18, GigabitEthernet0/0
192.168.41.0/24    auto-summary
192.168.41.0/24    directly connected, GigabitEthernet0/0
X.X.X.X/24    auto-summary
X.X.X.Y/30
    [1] via 192.168.41.11, 00:00:18, GigabitEthernet0/0
What gives? This really looks like a bug to me...
Anyhow I'm thinking a workaround might be to set up a GRE tunnel across those 10.0.X.X subnets to the other side so I can at least dynamically route traffic accross.... Without the RIP routes being announced I don't have automatic failover!
Thanks for your help,
   Curtis

Answer 1

Yes as was explained to me previously.... by Jason Nickle multicast does not cross a site-to-site tunnel.
That is not what I want to have happen. What I want is for my RV042 to announce it's VPN routes to other routers on the same physical network. Which it currently is not doing.
Site 1
    Cisco IOS Router X - main router, local network traffic runs across this
     RVO42 X - has VPN link to RVO42 Y at Site 2
Site 2
  Cisco IOS Router Y - main router, local newtok traffic runs acress this
   RVO42 Y - has VPN link to RVO42 X at Site 1
The problem is that RV042 Y doesn't tell Router Y that it has a route to Site 1. And RV042 X doesn't tell Router X that it has a route to Site 2. So they are not locally announcing via RIP, the routes they have TO the respective remote sites.
What I was trying to say in my original post, is that the router will announce VPN routes if the vpn subnets are a class A 10.X.X.X subnet, but it doesn't announce them if they are a class C 192.168.X.X subnet. So what I am doing should be working, however it is not.