eb67771e   
   XPost: comp.arch.embedded, sci.electronics.design   
   From: map.nospam@f2s.com   
      
   "Didi"  wrote in message   
   news:851c373c-9078-4880-aca1-18fb3e83389e@g19g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...   
   On Mar 29, 6:32 pm, "Boudewijn Dijkstra"   
    wrote:   
   > Op Mon, 29 Mar 2010 17:10:34 +0200 schreef glen herrmannsfeldt   
   > :   
   >>   
   >> In comp.protocols.tcp-ip markp  wrote:   
   >> (snip, someone wrote)   
   >>   
   >> Some will respond to a ping to the broadcast address, others not.   
   >>   
   >> Some will even respond differently to the subnet broadcast address (e.g.   
   >> 192.168.0.255) than the global broadcast address (255.255.255.255).   
   >>   
      
   > Hmm, do you still think it is "simple" (just kidding :-)).   
      
   :-)   
      
   OK, the ARP way sounds like you've got to send a ping first to establish the   
   route. However, since the only things you are worried about are your   
   web-servers you can guarantee they respond to that as you would have   
   programmed them too. As an aside, wouldn't the DHCP server when allocating   
   addresses in the first place do that automatically?   
      
   The original idea of sending a UDP broadcast enquiry packet and getting   
   replies is quite simple though. Only your servers would reply, and you could   
   even send the desired server's MAC address in the enquiry packet so only one   
   device that matches it would respond.   
      
   Mark.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)