Flooding VS Unknown Unicast Flooding

[Iluvnetwork]

PC1 -- SW -- PC2

                  -- PC3

When PC1 ping PC2's private IP address, PC1 would send the ARP first. Then, SW would definitely flood the ARP packet. My question is that which one is more accurate way to say this phenomenon? My answer is definitely "Unknown Unicast Flooding'. But my friend is insisting that he has never heard of the world "Unknown Unicast Flooding'. He said answer is just "flooding'. I would like to know which one is the more accurate terminology to describe this phenomenon :)

[Mark Malone]

There is a an unknown unicast flooding blocking UUFB where you can stop it with switchport block unicast on a switchport but usually as i have heard it its just called flooding like an arp flooding attack but you could call it unknown unicast flooding too as it is correct but i havent seen that stated as a common saying in the documnets anyway , they just usually call it flooding

[Iluvnetwork]

Could you please explain to me the differences between just flooding and unknown unicast flooding? I am a bit confused :(

[Mark Malone · Accepted solution]

Theres no difference its just how its being called , its flooding as its unknown to see where it belongs , but usually its just called flooding generally rather than the whole unknown unicast flooding
Cisco have created a command called UUBF to prevent a port receiving anything unknown you may want to prevent them speaking to unknown unicast incase its illegitimate as can be an ARP flood attack with malware and operates like a unknown unicast but it keeps flooding the network with erroneous replies

[Iluvnetwork]

Thank you so much. Exactly what I have been looking for :)