[Spread-users] spread without multicast
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.
>>From: spread-users-admin at lists.spread.org
>>[mailto:spread-users-admin at lists.spread.org] On Behalf Of
>>Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 9:47 PM
>>To: spread-users at lists.spread.org
>>Subject: [Spread-users] spread without multicast
>>Can I use spread with using multicast ?
>>Spread-users mailing list
>>Spread-users at lists.spread.org
> Spread-users mailing list
> Spread-users at lists.spread.org
Ryan W. Caudy
Center for Networking and Distributed Systems
Department of Computer Science
Johns Hopkins University
More information about the Spread-users