[Spread-users] spread without multicast

Ryan Caudy caudy at jhu.edu
Thu Dec 25 09:15:04 EST 2003

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.


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

More information about the Spread-users mailing list