home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
- Path: sparky!uunet!ornl!rsg1.er.usgs.gov!darwin.sura.net!sgiblab!sgigate!sgi!rhyolite!vjs
- From: vjs@rhyolite.wpd.sgi.com (Vernon Schryver)
- Subject: Re: Multicast Routers (was Re: NIS broadcasts over IP subnets)
- Message-ID: <sii7sjk@rhyolite.wpd.sgi.com>
- Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc. Mountain View, CA
- References: <1992Nov17.142856.19947@ccsun.strath.ac.uk> <1992Nov19.151355.20000@netcom.com>
- Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 17:14:32 GMT
- Lines: 34
-
- In article <1992Nov19.151355.20000@netcom.com>, tbooth@netcom.com (Todd Booth) writes:
- > >...
- > >In the sense you probably meant the question, I don't know. For years
- > >I hounded router vendors at Interop, and was always told "wait for
- > >OSPF."
- >
- > Why have you been waiting?
- >
- > OSPF is a draft internet standard and has been available for over
- > a year and a half from Wellfleet Communicaitons (and other vendors).
- > Cisco has been shipping OSPF since April?
-
-
- I know OSPF has been a draft standard for ages. I was only repeating
- what the router vendors told me at Interop90 and before.
-
- In the rest of my text, I wrote that at Interop 91 I was told by Cisco
- and others "forget DVMRP, and wait for the new link state multicast
- protocol that even Steve Deering supports." (Well, I didn't explicitly
- write "Interop 91".)
-
- Why is the IETF multicasting this week being done with tunnels?
- Is that only because of the backbone?
-
- Do Wellfleet, Cisco, or others now do the right things when they see a
- class D address? Do they forward such IP packets?
-
- As far as I can tell, the router vendors have been dragging their feet
- vigorously on any kind of multicast routing for at least 4 years. The
- router vendors have shown more enthusiasm for PPP, despite the danger
- PPP represents to their locked-in customer bases.
-
-
- vjs
-