Thanks Dar. I thought that is what I did (for UDP), and MC went into oblivion for about 2 minutes (and didn't broadcast). I will try it again...
open datagram socket to "255.255.255.255" This works for other UDP IP addresses, but maybe this is incorrect? JR > Message: 6 > Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 16:49:39 -0600 > Subject: Re: broadcast? > From: Dar Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > On Saturday, June 7, 2003, at 04:30 PM, RCS wrote: > > > Has anyone been able to do a broadcast message using TCP sockets or > > UDP? How > > did you do it? > > No broadcast for TCP. Use UDP. > > Use 255.255.255.255 as your ip destination address in open. > > Or, better yet, use the subnet broadcast address. For example if your > subnet is 10.50.0.0 with mask 255.255.0.0 then use 10.50.255.255 as > your broadcast address. > > I have seen my OS X translate 255.255.255.255 to a subnet broadcast on > my primary adaptor. My XP (or was it W2K?) did not. Perhaps there > will be a difference in behavior only if there is more than one subnet > on the LAN. I'm not sure what happens when you have more than one > adaptor and you use 255.255.255.255 as the address. > > Accept as usual (remember to close UDP these days). Send as usual. I > don't know if the new ability to reply to UDP will work with > broadcast--that would be cool. > > Dar Scott > Mostly-Lurking Revolution User > _______________________________________________ metacard mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
