From owner-freebsd-net Fri Jul 7 15: 6:51 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from rapidnet.com (rapidnet.com [205.164.216.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0608737B6A7; Fri, 7 Jul 2000 15:06:39 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from nick@rapidnet.com) Received: from localhost (nick@localhost) by rapidnet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA67245; Fri, 7 Jul 2000 16:06:23 -0600 (MDT) Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 16:06:23 -0600 (MDT) From: Nick Rogness To: "Louis A. Mamakos" Cc: Narvi , Sean Lutner , Nick Evans , "'freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org'" , "'freebsd-net@freebsd.org'" Subject: Re: bridging In-Reply-To: <200007072116.RAA95711@whizzo.transsys.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Fri, 7 Jul 2000, Louis A. Mamakos wrote: > They can't be in the same collision domain -- the only way to do that > is to have an Ethernet repeater which repeats bit by bit fron one > segment to another, and propagating a collision on one segment as a > jam on another. > > On a FreeBSD box, where you interfaces to ethernet segments are NIC > cards, you can't get your hands on the ethernet frame until the > NIC has received it completely. Thus, you don't have to opportunity > to act as a repeater (not that you'd want to anyway) to have a > single collision domain. You know, you are right...never thought it through completely before I sent my reply. Sorry everyone for the wasted bandwidth. Have 1 more question (has to do with this bridging deal): Anyone working on load-sharing/load-balancing or clustering network solution with FreeBSD? Nick Rogness - Speak softly and carry a Gigabit switch. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message