From: Tien (tientien.wang@gmail.com)
Date: Fri Sep 19 2008 - 17:30:39 ART
reason for using 29 is because we need to include the two media converts. we
need to have access to manage it.
i guess it would be fine even if its broadcast update, its only to 4 hosts.
i was just confused about the p2p network type and was thinking if the
update is send unicast. how does it know its sending to the .2 instead of .3
and .4.(media converters). so the confusion is cleared, its send via
multicast at the 224.0.0.5 AllOSPF address and eliminate the dr and bdr
election.
thank you for the explanation
Tien
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 7:03 PM, John Wayne <john.wayne.ccie@gmail.com>wrote:
> I like the neighbor statement and I like the idea of deterministic values
> to decide which device will be the dr. However using priority is. Now
> that will keep the traffic between just the two participants involved
> despite the mask. So why not use the /30 instead of the /29 since there are
> only two interfaces involved unless you are planning for scalability.
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 3:37 PM, Ibrahim kabir <kebramccie@live.com>wrote:
>
>> I guess am with roger on that one. I think if u need to send unicast
>> updates
>> its best (from IE ) to use a non-broadcast medium.
>>
>>
>> HTH
>>
>> Kabir
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> News, entertainment and everything you care about at Live.com. Get it now!
>> http://www.live.com/getstarted.aspx
>>
>>
>> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>>
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>> Subscription information may be found at:
>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Oct 04 2008 - 09:26:19 ART