[Spread-users] spread without multicast

[Ryan Caudy]

Thats true, but the message will still be sent to each daemon.  If the 
goal is to avoid using IP multicast communication, then segments could 
be set up with a broadcast address.  The other option, if you prefer not 
to have any IP multicast or broadcast communication, is to put each 
daemon in a segment by itself.  This isn't recommended, since it would 
severely decrease performance on most networks, although it would still 
provide the semantic guarantees you might need from Spread.

--Ryan

Chetan Gadgil wrote:
> I am not quite sure what you mean, but here's what I know:
> 
> 1) A "multicast" depends on the number of members in a group. Thus
> sending a message to a group with only one member would be a unicast.
> Sending it to a group without any members would be a "cast-away"? (sorry
> for the bad joke :-))
> 
> 2) When you connect, spread assigns you a private group. This can be
> used to achieve one-on-one communication.
> 
> 
> Regards
> Chetan
> 
> 
> 
> 
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: spread-users-admin at lists.spread.org 
>>[mailto:spread-users-admin at lists.spread.org] On Behalf Of 
>>Orit Wasserman
>>Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 9:47 PM
>>To: spread-users at lists.spread.org
>>Subject: [Spread-users] spread without multicast
>>
>>
>>Hi !
>>Can I use spread with using multicast ?
>>
>>Orit Wasserman.
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Spread-users mailing list
>>Spread-users at lists.spread.org 
>>http://lists.spread.org/mailman/listinfo/sprea> d-users
>>
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Spread-users mailing list
> Spread-users at lists.spread.org
> http://lists.spread.org/mailman/listinfo/spread-users
> 

-- 
Ryan W. Caudy
Center for Networking and Distributed Systems
Department of Computer Science
Johns Hopkins University