Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!ucsd!ucbvax!FTP.COM!ljm
From: ljm@FTP.COM (leo j mclaughlin iii)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: ARP question summary
Message-ID: <9103300818.AA08230@ftp.com>
Date: 30 Mar 91 08:18:10 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: ljm@ftp.com
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 23

>
>From the few responses I received so far it seems that the consensus
>is that one can reply using the broadcast address but this generally
>is not good practice due to excessive work this puts on the local
>workstations....  By "can do this" does this mean the general
>consensus is that this is legal?  Where can I contact the protocol
>police regarding this?  I'm not to sure which vendor to talk to about this.
>

Ancient versions of WIN/TCP for DOS sent ARP replies as broadcasts.
In some network configurations with some hosts bad things happened.
Unfortunately, I don't remember much of the details; I just fixed it
as soon as I noticed the behavior.

As far as 'legal' is concerned, use the only definition that matters
to the tcp-ip world.  If you are doing this for your own environment,
and nothing breaks, then go ahead.  If there is any chance of the software
being deseminated into the world at large, don't use broadcast ARP
replies as they may break other software.

enjoy,
leo j mclaughlin iii
ljm@ftp.com