1 |
On 2012-01-19, Michael Mol <mikemol@×××××.com> wrote: |
2 |
|
3 |
>>> Do you really want that much broadcast and wide multicast (think |
4 |
>>> DNS-SD and NTP in multicast mode) traffic on the same Ethernet |
5 |
>>> segment? |
6 |
>> |
7 |
>> That bit I don't understand. ??It's no worse that ARP, and we seem to |
8 |
>> live with that quite easily. |
9 |
> |
10 |
> Not just arp, but actual broadcast/multicast data. If you've ever run |
11 |
> PulseAudio and enabled network sources and sinks on a couple boxes, |
12 |
> you might have accidentally discovered an easy way to bring a wireless |
13 |
> network to its knees. And that's just something I've had personal |
14 |
> experience with. Come to think of it, that's a good reason I should |
15 |
> continue to keep my home wired and wireless networks on separate |
16 |
> subnets, and not simply bridged as I'd done at the time. |
17 |
|
18 |
I don't understand what that has to do with L-L address support in |
19 |
applications. |
20 |
|
21 |
-- |
22 |
Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! Youth of today! |
23 |
at Join me in a mass rally |
24 |
gmail.com for traditional mental |
25 |
attitudes! |