Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 13:23:50 -0400 (EDT) From: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org> To: Lowell Gilbert <freebsd-current-local@be-well.no-ip.com> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RFC: ported NetBSD if_bridge Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040417132238.8431C-100000@fledge.watson.org> In-Reply-To: <44ekqmhh11.fsf@be-well.ilk.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 17 Apr 2004, Lowell Gilbert wrote: > Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> writes: > > > On Fri, 16 Apr 2004, Bruce A. Mah wrote: > > > > 1. ng_bridge(4) doesn't do spanning tree. Neither does bridge(4). > > > > WHICH spanning tree? Spanning tree is a generic term.. > > Are you refering to a particular implimentation of something that uses > > spanning tree algorythms? > > They're referring to IEEE 802.1d. This is an important feature for > building large bridged networks. And it's an important part of many ethernet-layer redundancy solutions, since it allows fail-over when one bridging element or graph edge goes offline. It's something we really missed in some research work I was working on to build link layer filters, since it was an easy way to provide basic fail-over in the presence of ethernet link failures (and they happen a lot!) Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects robert@fledge.watson.org Senior Research Scientist, McAfee Research
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040417132238.8431C-100000>