From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 6 20:07:06 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9478316A407 for ; Wed, 6 Dec 2006 20:07:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cswiger@mac.com) Received: from smtpout.mac.com (smtpout.mac.com [17.250.248.173]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BEF243CC7 for ; Wed, 6 Dec 2006 20:06:17 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from cswiger@mac.com) Received: from mac.com (smtpin05-en2 [10.13.10.150]) by smtpout.mac.com (Xserve/8.12.11/smtpout03/MantshX 4.0) with ESMTP id kB6K0EC4006395; Wed, 6 Dec 2006 12:00:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from [17.214.13.96] (a17-214-13-96.apple.com [17.214.13.96]) (authenticated bits=0) by mac.com (Xserve/smtpin05/MantshX 4.0) with ESMTP id kB6JxONl017198; Wed, 6 Dec 2006 11:59:40 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <200612061908.MAA15281@lariat.net> References: <6199c3dc0612050848g16a0911dga145485ba14bf21f@mail.gmail.com> <200612060313.23621.josh@tcbug.org> <4576EB9D.2040300@elischer.org> <200612061153.26040.josh@tcbug.org> <200612061908.MAA15281@lariat.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Chuck Swiger Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2006 11:59:24 -0800 To: Brett Glass X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.2) X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-Brightmail-scanned: yes Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Bandwidth Monitoring program X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2006 20:07:06 -0000 On Dec 6, 2006, at 10:38 AM, Brett Glass wrote: > Is adding a hub or a bridge a topology change? I'd argue that it > wasn't. Um. Adding a normal client machine to an existing hub or switch does not constitute a topology change. Adding a new hub or bridge most certainly would constitute a topology change. [ Add "IMHO" and salt if needed to season to taste. But if the result of a change can result in a loop-- ie, connecting two ports on the new hub to the rest of the network, or connecting two ports from a bridge to the same hub/switch-- or if the change might result in the network no longer being in compliance with the networking requirements (ie, you can only daisy-chain a limited number of hubs together before you break the timing tolerance)-- such changes do effect the topology... ] -- -Chuck