Willem Jan Withagen wrote:
£ukasz Bromirski wrote:
Wouldn't it be a case for use of multicast vs unicast? Hardware
is always better anyway, so why not invest in some switch that
can do unicast/multicast in hardware?
Usefull suggestion, only this is going to be in an overlay cloud where
we do not have control over all the endpoint networks. let alone that we
can get them to use multicast. And even those that use multicast in their
last-mule equipment, don't always have correct setups.
My experience is that Multicast in nice in theory and experiment, but
when
push comes to shove it does not completely deliver.
I have to agree wholeheartedly, for more detail than you can shake a
stick at, look here:
http://www.cs.ucr.edu/~michalis/COURSES/204-02b/papers/ramalho.html
If you're running over MPLS all bets are off. MPLS is like ATM in the
sense that it ain't got no multicast grok, as far as I can fathom,
anyway. Label switching is label switching. I never saw any support for
the notion of 1:M in the LSPs.
Multicast is more likely to succeed at the moment when you have complete
knowledge of the network topology, and IP layer visibility. There are
ongoing efforts to address these limitations.
later
BMS
_______________________________________________
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
