From: damien (damien@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Thu Dec 28 2000 - 10:34:24 GMT-3
Hi Earl,
In RFC 1058 section 3.5, it does briefly mention unicast updates and that it
may be desirable in some cases to use unicast, but does leave it to the
vendor to decide.........
"Normally, when a response is to be sent to all destinations (that is,
either the regular update or a triggered
update is being prepared), a response is sent to the host at the opposite
end of each connected point-to-point link, and a response is broadcast on
all connected networks that support broadcasting. Thus, one response is
prepared for each directly-connected network and sent to the corresponding
(destination or broadcast) address. In most cases, this reaches all
neighboring gateways.
However, there are some cases where this may not be good enough. This may
involve a network that does not support broadcast (e.g., the ARPANET), or a
situation involving dumb gateways. In such cases, it may be necessary to
specify an actual list of neighboring hosts and gateways, and send a
datagram to each one explicitly. It is left to the implementor to determine
whether such a mechanism is needed, and to define how the list is
specified."
Damien
CCIE
----- Original Message -----
From: "Earl Aboytes" <Earl@dnssystems.com>
To: "'Thounda Craig Jr.'" <tcraig@network-data.com>; "Claude-Vincent"
<claude_vincent@yahoo.com>; "Earl Aboytes" <Earl@dnssystems.com>;
<ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2000 7:50 PM
Subject: RE: Rip RFC
> I am coming to the conclusion that this is a Cisco workaround and not part
> of the RFC. Thanks to all who answered.
> Earl Aboytes, CCIE 6097
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thounda Craig Jr. [mailto:hjcgroup@mindspring.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2000 6:03 PM
> To: Claude-Vincent; Earl Aboytes; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: Rip RFC
>
> Hi Earl,
>
> I'm not sure rgding the RFC (haven't reviewed it),
> but Doyle explains it under both specified (RIP) chapters.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Claude-Vincent" <claude_vincent@yahoo.com>
> To: "Earl Aboytes" <Earl@dnssystems.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2000 8:16 PM
> Subject: Re: Rip RFC
>
>
> > I have just gone through the RFCs but didn't find any evidence of the
> > existence of such command. Broadcasting for ripv1 and multicasting for
> > ripv2.
> >
> > Vincent
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Earl Aboytes" <Earl@dnssystems.com>
> > To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2000 9:29 AM
> > Subject: Rip RFC
> >
> >
> > > Does anyone know if the rip neighbor command is part of the rip RFC.
> > >
> > > Earl Aboytes, CCIE 6097
> > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:26:11 GMT-3