[Udpcast] does sender need to bind a socket to the multicast addr and receiver (portbase) port ?

Alban Rodriguez alban.rodriguez at univ-lr.fr
Tue Feb 9 18:16:16 CET 2010

Le 9 févr. 10 à 16:19, udpcast-request at udpcast.linux.lu a écrit :

> Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2010 16:19:44 +0100
> From: Jens Breuer <breuer.jens at googlemail.com>
> To: udpcast at udpcast.linux.lu
> Subject: Re: [Udpcast] does sender need to bind a socket to the
> 	multicast	addr and receiver (portbase) port ?
> Message-ID:
> 	<76ce20421002090719j1b354fay54a779bdccf9f0cf at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
> Hello Rodriguez
> You really should try with the most recent version of udpcast to check
> whether this problem has already been solved over the past 2 years.
> Additionally, I would recommend to triple-check the switch'
> configuration. From my experience in 99 out of 100 cases there is a
> network misconfiguration when experiencing problems with udpcast.
> Just my 0,5?.
> Kind regards
> Jens

Hi Jens,

Thanks for your answer; as I wrote, latest version (20100130) does the  
same. This is why I had to look at the code and make this dirty hack.

I'm pretty sure the Dell switch is culprit, but the multicast  
configuration looks good, and with the modified version of the sender  
multicast and igmp work as expected.

Do you think it is acceptable for the sender to query the multicast  
data group itself as the general rule or could it bring some more  
problems ? ( the later case would require my patching of the code with  
each new release ...). Maybe Alain is the only one who can state  
here ...


Alban Rodriguez
Centre de Ressources Informatiques
Université de La Rochelle

More information about the Udpcast mailing list