anything on 224.0.0.0 is directed to both of them however I want, in the instance of 224.0.5.128 to be directed to the second adapter only. I notice in the Ip tables there is the address 224.0.0.0 entries for BOTH adapters i.e. Unfortunately this is not the case and even after adding the route to the routing table those Converters on the Wide Area network continue to respond to the multi-cast. I then thought that any multicast to 224.0.5.128 would be directed to the second adapter only and hence only the converter to be programmed would be 'seen'. I want to be able to restrict this multicast to the adapter with the FIXED IP and hence thought I could achieve this by adding a route to the route table. This process is currently done through a piece of software provided by the manufacturer of the Converters. The first step in programming a converter is for it to be discovered by the XP machine and this is achieved using a multicast on address 224.0.5.128 causing ANY converter connected to the Ethernet cross-over cable (adpater 2) AND converters connected to the company network via adapter 1 to respond with their MAC address and hence be 'seen'. One card is used to access the company network and internet and its IP is assigned by DHCP whilst the second has a fixed IP and is used to program a specific type of hardware (let me refer to is as a 'converter' from this point onwards) via a cross-over Ethernet connection in a production type environment. I'm sorry about the formatting, I forgot the code blocks aren't monospaced.ĮDIT: Nevermind about the formatting, I'm just insane.I have a Windows XP machine that is fitted with two Network cards. The reason the answers are 39.12.1 and 167.12.1 is because of this ambiguity. The reason it's a 32:1 ambiguity is because five bits that uniquely identify that IPv4 multicast address aren't used. Others have already posted good answers, but I wanted to offer the math behind it and some examples.Ī multicast MAC address is able to represent 32 different IPv4 multicast addresses, in other words there is a 32:1 ambiguity when mapping the IPv4 multicast address to a multicast MAC address. All opinions stated are those of the poster only, and do not reflect the opinion of Cisco Systems Inc., or its affiliates. NOTE: The "Reddit Cisco Ring", its associates, subreddits, and creator "mechman991" are not endorsed, sponsored, or officially associated with Cisco Systems Inc.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |