From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 11:24:38 -0500
From: beto@plan9.cs.su.oz.au beto@plan9.cs.su.oz.au
Subject: IP Implementation of Plan 9
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 313ab3ec-eac8-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Message-ID: <19951031162438._LWKAst5TSd4RN1WMXZ9rmuGzQNDNY0QBCFDQSziRL8@z>

In <9510302212.AA03541@mwtech.rent-a-guru.de>
	Martin Weitzel <Martin.Weitzel@rent-a-guru.de> wrote:

> This is not tied to any specific problem, just out of curiosity:
> 
> Recently I gave a short introduction to Plan 9 for a couple of persons.
> One question I could not answer was whether the IP implementation was
> written "all fresh" or taken from any other system (e.g. the streams
> based implementation of SVR4).  A related question from the same person
> was if multicast addressing is supported by the IP implementation of Plan 9.
> 

Multicast is not supported in the new release. We, in basser, add multicast
to the IP code, ethernet filtering and counting, and IGMP processing in 
user-mode. We have a 9vat application, but it's not extremely clever
with missed and duplicated messages. 

If you are interesting in the code, or want to improve 9vat ☺ please
mail me.

beto