|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> In-Reply-To: <E1PSAxn-000E4q-5n@s0.nanog.org> Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 08:20:20 -0800 To: Berry Mobley <berry@gadsdenst.org> Cc: nanog@nanog.org Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org WOL is unfortunately terribly deficient in that the spec. never = envisioned the possibility of a need for wake on WAN. Bottom line, it's a non-routeable layer 2 protocol. Your choices boil = down to the helper address nightmare you describe or proxy servers on every subnet. Owen On Dec 13, 2010, at 8:08 AM, Berry Mobley wrote: > Hello... >=20 > I'm trying to get a handle on implementation of wake-on-lan in an = enterprise environment. Cisco gear, lots of subnets. I've made it work = with directed broadcasts, but I'd really rather not have 40 or 50 'ip = helper-address x.x.x.bcastaddr' statements on the vlans with the SMS = servers. >=20 > Are there any enterprises that are doing this for large (100+) numbers = of subnets? I can't find a single example anywhere with more than 2 = networks. >=20 > I've searched the Cisco-NSP archives as well with no luck, but maybe I = didn't go back far enough. >=20 > Thanks for any help you can provide. >=20 > Berry Mobley >=20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |