I will henceforth try to remember to run spell check. Misspelling “acedemic” is a lot like that ad Leno showed the other night which offered to “tudor English.”
s vermill wrote: > > Hello all, > > I am studying multicast technologies for acedemic reasons and > also so that I can hopefully resolve a real-world issue. I > have been reading about CGMP in various Cisco Press books, CCO > - all the usual suspects. Seems that all of the examples show > a switch directly connected to a router. Is it just a foregone > conclusion that a Catalyst switch with an on-board route > processor will be the architecture? Because I was thinking of > the typical switch block. You have your distribution layer > switch (hopefully L3 capable) and also a bunch of downstream > access layer switches. If a switch were stacked below an > upstream access layer switch instead of being directly > connected to distribution, I guess CGMP would break? A host on > the lowest switch in the stack might send an ICMP join. When > the router sends the CGMP message to the all-switch multicast, > the higher layer access switch wouldn't have the MAC address of > that host stored. So it wouldn't forward the multicast frame > on any of its ports? Or is it sent along all trunk ports by > default? > > I sense that I have lost sight of the big picture. > > Many thanks, > > Scott Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=34705&t=34704 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
