Comments inline:
""Priscilla Oppenheimer"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Steven A. Ridder wrote: > > > > I just want to make sure I'm correct: A VLAN will contain > > multicast traffic > > unless ip multicast routing is on the router (or other l3 > > device) right? > > Yes. VLANs contain multicasts just like they contain broadcasts. Or maybe > constrain is a better verb. Actually, bound may be the best verb. Is there any way a switch can "bleed" multicast traffic from one port to another, even though they are both tagged with different VLANS? I have a customer that when the do multicast traffic in one VLAN, all the lights light up on all the ports, like it would in a STP loop or something. I'm just trying to figure out how that could happen, when I know multicast is turned off. It's driving me nuts. > > > So > > a whole switch (or stack of switches) will not be flooded with > > one VLAN's > > multicast traffic, right? > > Right. > > > > > Also, why is "ip forward-protocol" or Ip helper-address on vlan > > interfaces > > on a l2 switch such as a cat 3500? Shouldn't that be on the > > subinterface of > > the l3 device? > > I agree that ip forward-protocol and ip helper-address only have meaning on > a L3 switch. But for a 3524, the command is there, and it's a L2 switch, so can I assume the IOS developers just didn't remove it? > > ________________________ > > Priscilla Oppenheimer > http://www.priscilla.com > > > > > > -- > > RFC 1149 Compliant Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=49148&t=49115 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
