Date: Fri, 15 Mar 1996 12:42:23 PST From: Bill Fenner <fenner@parc.xerox.com> To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> Cc: multimedia@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Seeking advice on mrouted configuration.. Message-ID: <96Mar15.124232pst.177478@crevenia.parc.xerox.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 28 Feb 1996 13:00:27 PST." <3508.825541227@time.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <3508.825541227@time.cdrom.com>you write: >Yes, both pairs are in the same subnets, but that should be OK from a >unicast point of view so why mandate special twisty semantics for >multicast when you don't have to? Is it really so hard to make >mrouted respect this scenario? Rather, "people noticed a long time ago that unicast doesn't break when you break the Internet architecture in this way, so it became accepted practice, so why does mrouted break?" -- well, because you broke the Internet architecture. I'm not saying that I'm not working on "fixing" such things, I'm just saying that it's more complex an issue [in fact, a fundamental architectural issue] than most people realize. Bill
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?96Mar15.124232pst.177478>