"Priscilla Oppenheimer" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > AppleTalk traffic doesn't bother other people. AppleTalk devices don't > broadcast; they multicast, and they don't do that very often. AppleTalk > routers and servers don't ever broadcast (or multicast) service > announcements like they do in an IPX environment. And the Chooser doesn't > broadcast either. A Mac sends a unicast packet to a router when the user > pulls up the Chooser. The router figures out which networks are in the zone > and forwards the unicast. The recipient routers then multicast. And, no, > this doesn't repeat forever at short intervals. Since Mac OX 7.0 (1989) the > Mac has backed off on the unicasts it sends to start the process.
Okay...at the risk of facing the wrath of Priscilla, here goes. =) Just off the top of my head, why would multicasting be any better than broadcasting.... in fact, wouldn't that be worst as broadcasts (L2 or L3) are stopped at the router whereas multicast could traverse your entire network, even through routers...? You gotta give me this tho: AppleTalk picks a layer three address at random, then checks to see if it's in use and repeats until it finds one it can use..... How lame is that?.... I was digging thru my CCNA notes from 2+ years ago and read a comment I wrote saying (about it choosing an L3 addr at random) "imagine if that were used on the internet... it could take days/weeks to get an IP address".. =) > You knew you would push one of my buttons, didn't you? ;-) > > As far as IPX traffic, it's not really that bad either, but the SAP > broadcasts can get excessive. There are many ways to keep them contained, > if that's what the poster had in mind. I think he better give us more info > on what he's trying to accomplish. I have to disagree here....... IPX traffic is horrible (admittedly due to Novell, not as a protocol itself per se..... also as you pointed out, in all fairness, a large %-age is SAP broadcasts and admittedly, the people whom I inherited the network from didn't do squat to limit any kind of SAP traffic)..... If you pick a random switchport out of the 28000+ switchports on our network and do a sniffer capture, you'll find probably 75% of it is IPX related... and we use IP for probably 90% of our apps (and web/internet access)..... that's not acceptable..... we cannot wait to get rid of IPX altogether (which will happen when our migration from Netware to 2000 is complete)..... I'm not a Microsoft zombie, by any means, and I won't even claim that Win2K and Active Directory is any better than Novell NDS, but getting rid of IPX is a godsend no matter if it means running Microslop Win2K.... that's how much we hate dealing with IPX =) > Hopefully he didn't just buy into the BS that "IPX is chatty" (the same BS > that you hear about AppleTalk. ;-) You want chatty, watch a Windows machine > running NetBIOS and SMB boot! Sounds like sour grapes. LOL (just kidding =) Hey.... I've seen your website with you @ your I-SCHMAC laptop.... so it doesn't surprise me to see you defending AppleSquawk... =) Mike W. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=42873&t=42855 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
