Skip to main content
replaced https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc with https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc
Source Link

The other day I ran across a piece of software configured to "multicast" using the address 255.5.6.7.

While I've seen local broadcast (255.255.255.255) and "true" multicast (as defined in rfc5771), this address seems to reside outside either of those recommendations. The address did seem to work, however, as a corresponding client was receiving the messages (it was on the same subnet).

I was wondering if this address worked merely since the first octet identified as broadcast, and network devices are coded to shortcut the logic. Does anyone know if this is the case or whether this address falls within another commonly recommended block?

For reference, I already checked RFC919RFC919 and RFC5771RFC5771 and neither seemed to include this block.

The other day I ran across a piece of software configured to "multicast" using the address 255.5.6.7.

While I've seen local broadcast (255.255.255.255) and "true" multicast (as defined in rfc5771), this address seems to reside outside either of those recommendations. The address did seem to work, however, as a corresponding client was receiving the messages (it was on the same subnet).

I was wondering if this address worked merely since the first octet identified as broadcast, and network devices are coded to shortcut the logic. Does anyone know if this is the case or whether this address falls within another commonly recommended block?

For reference, I already checked RFC919 and RFC5771 and neither seemed to include this block.

The other day I ran across a piece of software configured to "multicast" using the address 255.5.6.7.

While I've seen local broadcast (255.255.255.255) and "true" multicast (as defined in rfc5771), this address seems to reside outside either of those recommendations. The address did seem to work, however, as a corresponding client was receiving the messages (it was on the same subnet).

I was wondering if this address worked merely since the first octet identified as broadcast, and network devices are coded to shortcut the logic. Does anyone know if this is the case or whether this address falls within another commonly recommended block?

For reference, I already checked RFC919 and RFC5771 and neither seemed to include this block.

Source Link

Valid broadcast and multicast addressing

The other day I ran across a piece of software configured to "multicast" using the address 255.5.6.7.

While I've seen local broadcast (255.255.255.255) and "true" multicast (as defined in rfc5771), this address seems to reside outside either of those recommendations. The address did seem to work, however, as a corresponding client was receiving the messages (it was on the same subnet).

I was wondering if this address worked merely since the first octet identified as broadcast, and network devices are coded to shortcut the logic. Does anyone know if this is the case or whether this address falls within another commonly recommended block?

For reference, I already checked RFC919 and RFC5771 and neither seemed to include this block.