Re: MAC Machines | Bonjour Protocol | OT

Sorry I meant to say ip security cameras.

On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 7:48 AM, Anthony Faria <tfaria72_at_gmail.com> wrote:

> What is sad is Cisco uses this(bonjour) for their security ip security
> cameras for diagnostics.
>
>
> Tony
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 4:19 AM, Samer Labaky <samer.labaky_at_bmbgroup.com>wrote:
>
>> Thank you a lot,
>>
>> so no way to make it work without this software solution ?
>>
>> Can we buy it ?
>>
>> Is there any official document on the internet saying that this cannot
>> work.
>>
>> I need to convince my client by something on the internet.
>>
>> Thank you a lot guys for your support.
>> Samer
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Alexei Monastyrnyi [mailto:alexeim73_at_gmail.com]
>> Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 11:51 AM
>> To: Keegan.Holley_at_sungard.com
>> Cc: Samer Labaky; Cisco certification; nobody_at_groupstudy.com; Rick Mur
>> Subject: Re: MAC Machines | Bonjour Protocol | OT
>>
>> There is a custom solution to this issue, unfortunately not available
>> for public use. I have just checked with the authors, they have embedded
>>
>> that into their software solution for stock trading. Essentially it
>> tunnels via TCP whatever is on that group 224.0.0.251. This runs in form
>>
>> of Windows service or Unix daemon (currently on OSX, Solaris and Linux)
>> and quite a complex application in itself, capable of intercepting
>> Bonjour requests, tunneling, conditionally multicasting them into a
>> destination segment etc etc.
>>
>> Not sure if it helps. ;-) It is amazing however which ways people take
>> to make things working. They once hit the problem and just developed a
>> solution in a matter of week. :-)
>>
>> Cheers,
>> A.
>>
>> Keegan.Holley_at_sungard.com wrote:
>> > That you'd have to look up... I sniffed it and multicast dns
>> definitely
>> > uses a link local address (224.0.0.251) so it can't be routed. The
>> easy
>> > way would be to put the hosts back in the same vlan and just leave
>> them in
>> > different IP subnets. I'm not sure if this would break something else
>>
>> > though. Private vlans also come to mind, but that somehow seems like
>> > overkill.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > From:
>> > Samer Labaky <samer.labaky_at_bmbgroup.com>
>> > To:
>> > "Rick Mur" <rmur_at_ipexpert.com>, <Keegan.Holley_at_sungard.com>
>> > Cc:
>> > "Cisco certification" <ccielab_at_groupstudy.com>,
>> <nobody_at_groupstudy.com>
>> > Date:
>> > 11/23/2009 02:08 AM
>> > Subject:
>> > RE: MAC Machines | Bonjour Protocol | OT
>> > Sent by:
>> > <nobody_at_groupstudy.com>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Thank you all for your reply,
>> >
>> > So what can be done in order to make these MAC hosts communicate
>> > together across VLANs ?
>> >
>> > Is there any official website saying that they cannot work ?
>> >
>> > My client needs it and is not stopping asking me about it :)
>> >
>> > Help guys
>> >
>> > Thank you
>> > Samer
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Rick Mur [mailto:rmur_at_ipexpert.com]
>> > Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 8:54 AM
>> > To: Keegan.Holley_at_sungard.com
>> > Cc: Samer Labaky; Cisco certification; nobody_at_groupstudy.com
>> > Subject: Re: MAC Machines | Bonjour Protocol | OT
>> >
>> > I'm also not aware that this can work with multicast routing. You also
>> > have an issue with IGMP Snooping as it doesn't do IGMP, so on a switch
>> > where this is enabled it will not work.
>>
>>
>> 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
Received on Mon Nov 23 2009 - 07:53:36 ART