<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Bonjour control in ExtremeWireless (Identifi)</title>
    <link>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/extremewireless-identifi/bonjour-control/m-p/52805#M5788</link>
    <description>Hi, I understand that Extreme policy can control the Bonjour traffic. So, here I have two questions;&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
(1) Is there any demerit when I make a policy that AP rejects the bonjour packet at the edge?&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
(2) Usually, how much percentage of the traffic occupied by the bonjour traffic?&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
Thank you in advance.&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
Regards,&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
Yutaka Sasaki&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 May 2016 21:57:00 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Yutaka_Sasaki</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2016-05-19T21:57:00Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Bonjour control</title>
      <link>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/extremewireless-identifi/bonjour-control/m-p/52805#M5788</link>
      <description>Hi, I understand that Extreme policy can control the Bonjour traffic. So, here I have two questions;&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
(1) Is there any demerit when I make a policy that AP rejects the bonjour packet at the edge?&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
(2) Usually, how much percentage of the traffic occupied by the bonjour traffic?&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
Thank you in advance.&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
Regards,&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
Yutaka Sasaki&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 May 2016 21:57:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/extremewireless-identifi/bonjour-control/m-p/52805#M5788</guid>
      <dc:creator>Yutaka_Sasaki</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-05-19T21:57:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>RE: Bonjour control</title>
      <link>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/extremewireless-identifi/bonjour-control/m-p/52806#M5789</link>
      <description>I've had quite a few requests through the years where the switch can have a lot of trouble once bonjour is introduced in the network. The problem is that it can be a very chatty protocol and if you have a lot of different endpoints sending, it can quickly get out of hand. If you can cut it off at the AP instead of it going to the switch, I can only see it improving things.</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 May 2016 07:54:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/extremewireless-identifi/bonjour-control/m-p/52806#M5789</guid>
      <dc:creator>BradP</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-05-20T07:54:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>RE: Bonjour control</title>
      <link>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/extremewireless-identifi/bonjour-control/m-p/52807#M5790</link>
      <description>A big problem with Bonjour (or any other link-local protocol used by many clients) on Wi-Fi results from multicasts (and broadcasts) being sent with the slowest transmission speed of the Wi-Fi version used. Many multicast packets thus result in a lot of airtime wasted by these protocols, without a real benefit.&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
On a wired network they can cause a problem with IGMP snooping, because practically every client both sends an receives the respective multicast groups, which results in many IGMP snooping entries, possibly too many for the switch.&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 May 2016 15:31:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/extremewireless-identifi/bonjour-control/m-p/52807#M5790</guid>
      <dc:creator>Erik_Auerswald</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-05-20T15:31:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>RE: Bonjour control</title>
      <link>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/extremewireless-identifi/bonjour-control/m-p/52808#M5791</link>
      <description>Hi Brad, Hi Erik,&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
Thanks a lot! Both of your comments are very helpful to me. &lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 May 2016 16:27:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/extremewireless-identifi/bonjour-control/m-p/52808#M5791</guid>
      <dc:creator>Yutaka_Sasaki</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-05-20T16:27:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>RE: Bonjour control</title>
      <link>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/extremewireless-identifi/bonjour-control/m-p/52809#M5792</link>
      <description>Another problem with Bonjour, MDNS, and LLMNR multicast traffic using group addresses within 224.0.0.0/24 is the associated CPU load of switches. If a switch receives a multicast packet with group address in this range on an IP interface, it will forward this packet to the CPU. This results in increased CPU load.&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
The GTAC Knowledge Article &lt;A href="https://gtacknowledge.extremenetworks.com/articles/Q_A/How-can-I-block-mDNS-with-an-ACL-using-MAC-addresses/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noreferrer noopener"&gt;How can I block mDNS with an ACL using MAC addresses&lt;/A&gt; is related to this problem.&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Jun 2016 18:44:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/extremewireless-identifi/bonjour-control/m-p/52809#M5792</guid>
      <dc:creator>Erik_Auerswald</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-06-06T18:44:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

