Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 14:28:59 -0600 (MDT) From: Nick Rogness <nick@rapidnet.com> To: Narvi <narvi@haldjas.folklore.ee> Cc: Sean Lutner <sean@rentul.net>, Nick Evans <nevans@nextvenue.com>, "'freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org'" <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>, "'freebsd-net@freebsd.org'" <freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: bridging Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0007071351400.78571-100000@rapidnet.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.1000707214803.19655E-100000@haldjas.folklore.ee>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 7 Jul 2000, Narvi wrote: > > On Thu, 6 Jul 2000, Sean Lutner wrote: > > > > > > > > Bridges create a broadcast zone. broadcast packets will cross the bridge > > > unobstructed. > > > > OK. So do bridged interfaces fall within the same collision > > domain?... or are they just members of the same broadcast domain? > > > > They can't be in the same collison domain - you'll realise it if you > think about it for a second. It is possible to span 2 collison domains across 1 VLAN...so yes they could be, if it were possible with FreeBSD (?IS it?) to put two ethernet cards in this setup: FreeBSD int1 int2 / \ / \ / \ switch1 switch2 If int1 and int2 were part of the same collision domain, then switch1 and switch2 would also be part of the same collosion domain and visa versa. This would be pretty cool to see happen, essentially making a VLAN switch (with Layer 3 capabilities). Nick Rogness - Speak softly and carry a Gigabit switch. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0007071351400.78571-100000>