From owner-freebsd-net Tue Aug 28 13: 8:14 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu (khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu [18.24.4.193]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 601D437B403 for ; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 13:08:10 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu) Received: (from wollman@localhost) by khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.4/8.11.4) id f7SK88340636; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 16:08:08 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from wollman) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2001 16:08:08 -0400 (EDT) From: Garrett Wollman Message-Id: <200108282008.f7SK88340636@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> To: Alex Pilosov Cc: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Runt frames = broken VLAN ? In-Reply-To: References: <200108281759.f7SHxh439282@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org < said: > Disagree. Packet is either a runt or not a runt. It cannot be > inconsistently bridged it to one (trunk) interface but not to (access) > interface. Runt-ness is not a property of the contents of the frame, it's a property of the wire the frame is sent on. A frame bridged from another network with no minimum frame length must be properly padded upon output if it is to be sent on an Ethernet. -GAWollman To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message