Howard C. Berkowitz wrote: > > Priscilla, you know I'm writing on a Mac. Still, this reminds > me of > Eve's explanation of giving Adam the Apple! :-)
Or maybe giving Alan the Apple. Hee hee. Inside joke. I am a little sensitive when it comes to AppleTalk, having been intimately involved in its development, so to speak. ;-) > > Technically correct, of course. > > > At 5:54 PM +0000 7/15/02, Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote: > >Dan Penn wrote: > >> > >> Check out the outline on CCO. As far as I know SNA, IPX, > and > >> Applecrap, > >> I mean I talk, are still there for CID. > > > >And, sir, why do you call it Applecrap? ;-) Seriously, can you > provide some > >technical reasons to disparage it? > > > >Perhaps it's still on Cisco tests because the philosophies > behind AppleTalk > >had a big impact on modern desktop protocol design. Also, many > universities > >and schools of all sorts still have large AppleTalk networks. > You would be > >surprised at how many still use it. It's also still used at > scientific and > >graphics arts companies. > > > >Many protocol designers admire the pioneering work that Apple > did to make > >networks plug and play. There's a new IETF working group > called the Zero > >Configuration Networking group that credits AppleTalk. See > here for more info: > > > >http://www.zeroconf.org/ > > > >Note that IPv6 has serverless autonegotiation of network-layer > addresses > >which behaves quite a bit like AppleTalk. (It probably won't > catch on in > >many environments which have a DHCP server, but it may catch > on in other > >environments). And how about Microsoft's automatic addressing. > (Of course we > >normally only see that when DHCP has failed, but still > Microsoft thought > >enough of the AppleTalk mechanism to steal it. ;-) > > > >And how about service location? TCP/IP barely even has service > location, > >still to this day. Don't you think it's a little silly that we > have to find > >resources with a search engine? There is hope with new > protocols like the > >Service Location Protocol (SLP) and some of the new multicast > protocols that > >let you find multicasting servers. Note that the SLP RFC > credits AppleTalk. > > > >Maybe some "expert" told you that AppleTalk is "chatty." For > one thing, any > >protocol that tries to automate service location, speed up > routing protocol > >convergence, and quickly workaround connection disconnects is > going to be a > >bit chatty. It's a tradeoff. AppleTalk is no more chatty than > Windows > >Networking or IPX. And you want chatty, how about all those > keepalives and > >hellos that Cisco routers send? > > > >Maybe that same "expert" told you to avoid AppleTalk because > it broadcasts > >too much. That's a myth. It uses multicasts, for one thing, > which means a > >decent NIC driver that doesn't do AppleTalk shouldn't bother > the host. > > > >The descriptions you see about Chooser behavior are mostly > nonsense. The > >Chooser doesn't send broadcasts. It sends broadcast requests > which are > >forwarded (as unicasts) to each router in the zone. Those > routers send a > >multicast onto their networks in the zone. With good network > design, this is > >no problem. > > > >The Chooser doesn't send continually unless the user leaves it > open with a > >zone and service highlighted, which is almost never the case. > Then it does > >send rather often, but backs off after 45 seconds. The problem > where it sent > >the broadcast request packets (which are really unicasts) very > often, > >without backing off, was fixed in 1989. By then, it was too > late. The > >criticism of its behavior (even though already based on > misinformation) was > >entrenched in people's minds. > > > >Hey, I could go on and on, but I'll stop here, you'll be glad > to see. ;-) > > > >________________________ > > > >Priscilla Oppenheimer > >http://www.priscilla.com > > > > > >> > >> Dan > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > On > >> Behalf Of > >> suaveguru > >> Sent: Monday, July 15, 2002 9:53 AM > >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Subject: CID Exam 3.0 [7:48839] > >> > >> hi anyone knows what I should emphasize for the CID > >> exam ? Should I drop SNA , appletalk? What should I > >> concentrate on > >> > >> > >> thanks > >> > >> suaveguru > >> > >> __________________________________________________ > >> Do You Yahoo!? > >> Yahoo! Autos - Get free new car price quotes > >> http://autos.yahoo.com > > Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=48865&t=48839 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
