From: Scott Morris (swm@emanon.com)
Date: Sun Oct 16 2005 - 23:23:57 GMT-3
All packets using 224.0.0.x (link local multicast) are, as defined, link
local. Meaning the TTL is 1.
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Chris
Sent: Sunday, October 16, 2005 10:13 PM
To: 'Tim'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: TTL on RIP updates
Looking through the RFC, there does not seem to be anything that specifies
that an IP packet containing a RIP update should mark IP header TTL any
differently then whatever the default IP stack implementation dictates for a
TTL. I would not think there would be any reason to do so since RIP normally
sends updates to neighbors by broadcast or multicast which would bound the
packet to the closest router where TTL would normally decrement, but that is
just me theorizing. As I said the rfc does not say anything about marking
the IP header TTL for RIP any differently.
Chris
--------------------------------------------------
Christopher Larson CCIE#12380, PMP
Superior Technology Networks Corp
www.supertechnetworks.com - Technology Consulting www.ccierackrental.com
-Cisco Rack Rental
tel: 703 577 3303 fax: 703 286 5018
--------------------------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of Tim
Sent: Sunday, October 16, 2005 4:24 PM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: TTL on RIP updates
Hi guys,
I seem to recall that the TTL for rip updates is 2.
Is that true only if the neighbor command is used? Or if the default dest
address is 224.0.0.9? Or, never?
TIA, Tim
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Nov 06 2005 - 22:00:51 GMT-3