Date: Tue, 7 May 2002 10:36:44 +0100 From: Ceri Davies <setantae@submonkey.net> To: Alex Dupre <sysadmin@alexdupre.com> Cc: doc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Advanced Networking Question Message-ID: <20020507093644.GA7039@submonkey.net> In-Reply-To: <3CD6BD40.7040001@alexdupre.com> References: <20020506124528.GA7841@submonkey.net> <3CD6BD40.7040001@alexdupre.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, May 06, 2002 at 07:28:32PM +0200, Alex Dupre wrote: > Ceri Davies wrote: > > <para>Either way, routing tables are set up so that each subnet knows > > that this machine is the defined gateway (inbound route) to the other > > subnet. This configuration, with the machine acting as a Bridge > > <===== > > between the two subnets, is often used when we need to implement > > packet filtering or firewall security in either or both > > directions.</para> > > > >Now I could be wrong, but I was under the impression that routing was a > >layer > >3 function, and bridging was layer two, so isn't the statement that the > >machine > >is acting as a bridge incorrect (since it also states that the machine is > >doing > >routing) ? > > Yes, you are right. A bridge doesn't do routing between two different > subnets. That's a router task. IMHO in that phrase the word "Bridge" should > be replaced by "Router". That's what I thought. I'll fix it sometime later today. Ceri -- get the cool shoe shine To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020507093644.GA7039>