From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 24 22:43:13 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4AB4106566C for ; Mon, 24 Oct 2011 22:43:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wjw@digiware.nl) Received: from mail.digiware.nl (mail.ip6.digiware.nl [IPv6:2001:4cb8:1:106::2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 692E68FC0A for ; Mon, 24 Oct 2011 22:43:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from rack1.digiware.nl (localhost.digiware.nl [127.0.0.1]) by mail.digiware.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id B72FF153434; Tue, 25 Oct 2011 00:43:11 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at digiware.nl Received: from mail.digiware.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by rack1.digiware.nl (rack1.digiware.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id F8qHxqX1zVV9; Tue, 25 Oct 2011 00:43:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [IPv6:2001:4cb8:3:1:c02b:ce62:71ff:9cbc] (unknown [IPv6:2001:4cb8:3:1:c02b:ce62:71ff:9cbc]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.digiware.nl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CA5B2153433; Tue, 25 Oct 2011 00:43:09 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4EA5EA04.9020403@digiware.nl> Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 00:43:16 +0200 From: Willem Jan Withagen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20110929 Thunderbird/7.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: perryh@pluto.rain.com References: <4ea18916.IBAr0lF5RCzEYn6G%perryh@pluto.rain.com> <4EA12D26.4020104@my.gd> <4ea2b29c.QmX94UmzdHW1HSBe%perryh@pluto.rain.com> <20111022052952.GA2371@icarus.home.lan> <4ea2e874.XnQpdCknhYCB39Py%perryh@pluto.rain.com> <4ea42e1f.jwGZJ3vXBxYqD41h%perryh@pluto.rain.com> In-Reply-To: <4ea42e1f.jwGZJ3vXBxYqD41h%perryh@pluto.rain.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.3.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, freebsd@jdc.parodius.com Subject: Re: 8.1 xl + dual-speed Netgear hub = yoyo X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 22:43:13 -0000 On 23-10-2011 17:09, perryh@pluto.rain.com wrote: >> but there was no forwarding table and all packets were forwarded >> to all ports. > > I always figured that's normal for a "hub" as opposed to a "switch". > >> I also remember that SOME hubs of that era had series problems if >> the cable was too short. How come I feel old. Well I think that that was the reason why thick-Ethernet used to have repeaters and bridges. Repeaters just did what they said, on the most basic electrical level. Nothing more that a 2 port HUB, but then with MUI connectors. They where just part of the collision domain. Bridges actually learned which hosts where on the left and the right side. And only bridged when they really needed to. Otherwise they'd leave the traffic on the segment where it originated. It did segment the collision domain into two parts. And they used to be horrendously expensive and only run 10Mbit. --WjW