Refer to the exhibit. Two ISPs have decided to use MSDP and configured routers X and Y (both are PIM RPs) as MSDP peers. In the domain of ISP B, PC A has sent an IGMP membership report for the group 224.1.1.1 and PC B has sent an IGMP membership report for the group 224.5.5.5. Assuming that the MSDP peering relationship between routers X and Y is functional, and given the partial configuration output shown from router X, which two of these statements are true? (Choose two.)

A.
Router X will contain an entry for 224.1.1.1 in its SA cache and will also have an installed (S, G) entry for this in its mroute table.

B.
Router X will not contain an entry for 224.1.1.1 in its SA cache but will have an installed (*, G) entry for this in its mroute table.

C.
Router X will not contain an entry for 224.5.5.5 in its SA cache but will have an installed (S, G) entry for this in its mroute table.

D.
Router X will not contain an entry for 224.5.5.5 in its SA cache but will have an installed (*, G) entry for this in its mroute table.

E.
Router X will have no entries for 224.5.5.5 in neither its SA cache nor in its mroute table.

F.
Router X will have no entries for 224.1.1.1 in neither its SA cache nor in its mroute table.

Explanation:
In this question the presence of RPs point us to the use of PIM Sparse-Mode. MSDP Peer X is filtering the SA-Cache (source Active) inbound via ACL 101 which would implicit deny group 224.5.5.5 (thus no (S,G) entry in router X SA-Cache) but would permit the join for group 224.1.1.1 thus RP X would have an (S,G) for the group as the source would be known via the MSDP peer 2.2.2.3 (router Y) .
The second answer is that the Host residing in ISP-B domain sent a IGMP join for the group 224.5.5.5 which creates a (*,G) entry on each RPF router towards RP X, but because the source of group 224.5.5.5 is filtered the source would remain unknown.