waters@oracle.DEC (Greg Waters, 225-4986, HLO2-1/J12) (02/19/86)
I don't know why I'm contributing my 2 cents, because I'm an "expert" and not an Expert. Maybe some day when I grow up I can be just like.... Sounds to me like most people think of a bridge as protocol transparent at the data link level. NO messing with "immediate source addresses." One can indeed build a smart bridge that appears to route, but puts the routing hooks in BELOW the data link information that is provided to higher layers. On Ethernet, this out-of-band information would have to be implemented as network management packets communicated between the Bridges. As I understand our Ethernet bridge product, it's normal mode of operation is that of a "dumb" bridge, not a "routing" bridge, so it cannot tolerate cycles and hot standbys without that net management stuff. A "bridge" that messes with the data link information to effect routing is operating at the transport layer, not the data link layer, if I understand those layer terms. Shouldn't such a device be called a "router", or perhaps a "routing bridge"? I totally agree with Skip's definitions of Repeater and Gateway. I say again that I'm not an Expert, and further, that I don't recall the details of optional configurations of our Ethernet bridge product. Therefore, I may have misrepresented it. Greg Waters, DEC/Hudson,MA ...!decvax!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-oracle!waters "This message will self-destruct in five seconds..."