Talk:Multicast

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Multicast article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 365 days

Computing: Networking Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Networking task force (assessed as High-importance).

Simply Bad Writing[edit]

It seems that the writer of this article does not have a good grasp of English and/or of writing in general. I would prefer an article written by a native speaker who can construct a grammatically correct sentence.

PCI[edit]

PCI and PCI Express Multicast discussion is entirely missing from this article- it would be useful to include at least a pointer to this important feature for multi-computing architectures and switches. -- bvh

XCAST[edit]

I managed to find a little information on this japanese development, yet most links point to 404. Is this technology more than just a legend? What happened to the IBM implementation? Is there an XCAST for IPv4 at all? Do implementations only exist for FreeBSD? ---SymlynX 04:28, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Update: XCAST appears to be an IP Multicast compatible API that explicitely lists the distribution tree rather than using the regular mechanisms of IP Multicast. Yet it seems to do a multicast type of distribution. Hard to tell if this is properly placed here or rather in the IP Multicast article. What do you think? Should we mention it at all if it doesn't seem to be neither available nor in use? --SymlynX 16:07, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's now a paragraph on Xcast in Multicast#Application layer. ~Kvng (talk) 17:28, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Do XMPP and SMTP multicast?[edit]

In a protocol extension numbered XEP 0033 XMPP authors claim the word multicast for a syntax sending one message to multiple recipients in an equivalent way to SMTP's Cc: headers. If this isn't improper use of the word multicast, we must also mention SMTP being a multicast protocol as it operates exactly in the same way. Opinions? --lynX

This would be considered an application layer multicast. We can add this to the examples given in that section. I don't think that's necessary. ~Kvng (talk) 17:28, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Multicast in TCP?[edit]

Is it possible to do multicasting with TCP? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.180.136.16 (talk) 22:46, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you mean 'Can u do _IP_ multicast with TCP', no. plain TCP requires the sender & receiver to establish a 3 way handshake and this is only between two parties. TCP also uses other mechanisms for flow control etc which are geared towards a two party only config. Having said that TCP maybe used to setup multicast topologies in higher layers (see above discussions on IRC etc). There might also be other reliable & possiblly connection oriented layer 4 protocols that support IP multicast. 203.173.11.157 (talk) 09:29, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not only is “multicast TCP” nonsensical, I TCP tarpit anyone who tries in my firewall. 2001:470:D:468:51A1:B3B1:4729:2DD5 (talk) 18:32, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable multicast is the proposed means for achieving TCP-like behavior from multicast. ~Kvng (talk) 17:28, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]