Host Announcement

[MCCALL,DON (HP-USA,ex1)]

Hi Silviu,
the short answer to that is "browsing sucks".  That's just the way
MS implemented it. Sorry.  There are probably ways of defeating this, but I
have 
never done it; you can reduce the amount of broadcast traffic by making all
the 
clients and servers use WINS, but this affects name lookup; browsing and
browse lists
are still going to depend on broadcast...  Perhaps someone else on the list
has 
addressed eliminating broadcasts on their network???

Don
-----Original Message-----
From: Silviu Marin-Caea [mailto:silviu at delrom.ro]
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 9:03 AM
To: samba at lists.samba.org
Subject: Re: Host Announcement


On Fri, 14 Sep 2001 08:45:36 -0400
"MCCALL,DON (HP-USA,ex1)" <don_mccall at hp.com> wrote:

> 
> Hi Silviu,
> The broadcasts from the computers are how the master browser
determines 
> which computers should be 'aged' out of its browse list.  The browse
master
> doesn't go 'looking' for computers, but instead adds a computer to
its
> browse 

What I don't understand is: why don't the clients store the address of
the master browser and then send keepalives directly to it?  If they
cannot reach that address, it means the master browser died or
changed, and only then broadcast should occur.

In some cases bandwidth is not cheap.  I have broadcasts traveling a
radio link for nothing, and it pisses me off.  I know I could use
routers, but, firstly, I'm trying hard to get rid of the unnecessary
broadcasts.

-- 
Systems and Network Administrator - Delta Romania
Phone +4093-267961

-- 
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions:  http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba