Question about protected port with unknown multicast blocking

From: johngibson1541@yahoo.com
Date: Tue May 22 2007 - 15:28:14 ART

• Next message: johngibson1541@yahoo.com: "Re: Question about protected port with unknown multicast"
• Previous message: Ronnie Angello: "Re: At last the sun shone on this part"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Appreciate any response.

If that config blocks 0100.5e**.**** (IPv4 multicast),
then the hosts in that port can't receive ipv4 multicast directly
from multicast server from another protected port. Sounds OK.

However, if we need to explicitly configure blocking unknown
multicast to offer that level of protection, what does
"switchport protected" do ? So, we can safely assume blocking unknown
multicast doesn't change any processing (from plain protected port)
with 0100.5e**.****

However, if blocking unknown multicast doesn't change any processing
 (from plain protected port) with 0100.5e**.**** , it only adds
extra protection against multicast ehthernet addresses that our
hosts don't know about, how could that extra protection necessary ?
The unknown addresses are discarded at the switch by default any ways
right ?

• Next message: johngibson1541@yahoo.com: "Re: Question about protected port with unknown multicast"
• Previous message: Ronnie Angello: "Re: At last the sun shone on this part"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jun 01 2007 - 06:55:21 ART