:: Re: [DNG] Request for information -…
Top Page
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Author: o1bigtenor
Date:  
To: Dan Purgert, Jim Jackson, Dng
Subject: Re: [DNG] Request for information - - re: networking
On Tue, Jun 6, 2023 at 9:48 AM Dan Purgert via Dng <dng@???> wrote:
>
> On Jun 06, 2023, Jim Jackson wrote:
> > On Tue, 6 Jun 2023, Didier Kryn wrote:
> > > Le 06/06/2023 à 04:02, Dan Purgert via Dng a écrit :
> > > >  [... a bunch of stuff describing general breakouts for 1k hosts
> > > >   as an aside discussion to the OP's question ...]
> > >     Didn't you forget that all these sensors don't speak to each other,
> > > but they instead only speak with one single host. Given that, I'm not
> > > sure breaking down the traffic into many local loops would bring much
> > > improvement.

> >
> > From the OP's description of his proposed setup, I agree.
> >
> > Interestingly IPv6 over ethernet was designed to make it easier for
> > one lan to have most hosts - it uses multicast instead of broadcast so
> > it does depend on switches being able handle multicast reasonably
> > inelligently. In this case I suppose it could be possible to run the
> > setup using IPv6 link local addresses :-)
>
>
> You still end up getting inundated with ARP and other types of cruft. I
> haven't read anything that really indicates that v6 is any better at
> handling >1k hosts in a single broadcast domain than v4 is; but then
> again I also haven't kept as closely up-to-date with it as I did up til
> about 2018 or so.
>
> (references / new reading material would be appreciated ^_^ )
>
>

Such reading material would also be greatly appreciated by me.

Spending some time reading up on ModBus and CanBus at the
moment.

TIA