Firewall Wizards mailing list archives
Re: Tranparent bridge
From: Paul Robertson <proberts () patriot net>
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 12:57:52 -0400 (EDT)
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003, Tony Rall wrote:
Sorry for the digression, but aren't all bridges supposed to be transparent?
Nope, you can build a non-transparent bridge if you want. It helps the drivers in the cars see where... nahhh... A non-transparent bridge will modify the MAC address of the packets as it bridges them between networks, a transparent bridge will forward all the layer 2 traffic unaltered. The right combination of proxy arp and forwarding might technically make a non-transparent bridge (if you did all the broadcast/multicast stuff too.) The main advantage would be in having smaller ARP tables at each node. These days, I think the transparent is mostly in there to distinguish it from source route bridging. In SRB, the route is added by the device into the token-ring frame (well, you can do the explorer thing, but I've never seen a network set up that way.) Generally SRB was used to take SNA over an intermediate network between two token ring LANs. Paul ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul D. Robertson "My statements in this message are personal opinions proberts () patriot net which may have no basis whatsoever in fact." probertson () trusecure com Director of Risk Assessment TruSecure Corporation _______________________________________________ firewall-wizards mailing list firewall-wizards () honor icsalabs com http://honor.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards
Current thread:
- Tranparent bridge Chris Ditri (Sep 23)
- Re: Tranparent bridge Tony Rall (Sep 25)
- Re: Tranparent bridge Paul Robertson (Sep 25)
- Re: Tranparent bridge Paul Robertson (Sep 25)
- Re: Tranparent bridge Paul Robertson (Sep 25)
- Re: Tranparent bridge Martin Peikert (Sep 25)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: Tranparent bridge Melson, Paul (Sep 25)
- Re: Tranparent bridge Tony Rall (Sep 25)