[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#6707) Announce server on LAN

["Todd Goodman" <tsg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

* Raimar Falke <i-freeciv-lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> [031105 07:04]:
> On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 11:05:37AM -0800, Todd Goodman wrote:
> > * Raimar Falke <i-freeciv-lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> [031103 11:30]:
> > > In addition the URL states:
> > > 
> > >    In any case, range 224.0.0.0 through 224.0.0.255 is reserved for
> > >    local purposes (as administrative and maintenance tasks) and
> > >    datagrams destined to them are never forwarded by multicast
> > >    routers.
> > > 
> > > So if we choose 224.0.0.1 we know that all hosts are on this group AND
> > > we know that the TTL is irrelevant since the packets are routed.
> > > 
> > > The only problem I see is that the server is behind a router. So how
> > > do you define LAN?
> > > 
> > > If all this is correct I'm favoring as the default a scan in 224.0.0.1
> > > with no special TTL and (optionally if you want to code it) "an export
> > > mode" where you can input a special multicast group and optionally a
> > > TTL.
> > 
> > But why would you send all hosts on the local network Freeciv specific
> > packets?
> 
> Because it is multicast.

But it isn't broadcast.

The whole point of multicast is to send to a subset of addresses on the
Ethernet without resorting to broadcasting.

The all hosts address is mainly so that routers can send packets that all
hosts would like to receive (supposedly all hosts would want to receive
an indication that they can send traffic off the local network via that
router.)

> 
> > That seems like a good way to get administrators mad at Freeciv and any
> > users running it.
> 
> Not from 1 byte packets.

You know different administrators than I do.  :-)

Todd

> 
>       Raimar
> 
> -- 
>  email: rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>  "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
>     -- Arthur C. Clarke