From: Justin Menga (Justin.Menga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Mon Nov 06 2000 - 21:44:46 GMT-3
It is not a good idea to compare promiscuous and peer-on-demand-defaults.
Basically, for the promiscuous to work, peer-on-demand must work.
-----Original Message-----
From: Sam Munzani [mailto:sam@munzani.com]
Sent: Tuesday, 7 November 2000 3:40 a.m.
To: Bill Dellamar; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: dlsw
Big difference.
1. Promiscous
Ans: It sits idle and waits for a date. Doesn't propose from it's end. If
some remote end asks it out it will go.
2. Peer On Demmand.
ANS: The remote guy will not ask out to the date waiting idle unless their
co-workers will push him to ask.
I think you got the picture.
Sam
> Could someone explain the difference between
> promiscous and peer-on-demand-defaults.
>
> Promiscous - will accept connections without defining
> remote-peers.
>
> Peer-on-demand-defaults - is a non-configured
> remote-peer that was connected because of an LLC2
> session established through a border peer DLSw+
> network.
>
> Aren't these the same thing? Or won't promiscous
> accept a connection from a border peer?
>
> Any input would be appreciated.
> Thanks,
> Bill
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:25:42 GMT-3