They can't be in the same collision domain -- the only way to do that
is to have an Ethernet repeater which repeats bit by bit fron one
segment to another, and propagating a collision on one segment as a
jam on another.
On a FreeBSD box, where you interfaces to ethernet segments are NIC
cards, you can't get your hands on the ethernet frame until the
NIC has received it completely. Thus, you don't have to opportunity
to act as a repeater (not that you'd want to anyway) to have a
single collision domain.
louie
> On Fri, 7 Jul 2000, Narvi wrote:
>
> > > On Thu, 6 Jul 2000, Sean Lutner wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Bridges create a broadcast zone. broadcast packets will cross the bridge
> > > > unobstructed.
> > >
> > > OK. So do bridged interfaces fall within the same collision
> > > domain?... or are they just members of the same broadcast domain?
> > >
> >
> > They can't be in the same collison domain - you'll realise it if you
> > think about it for a second.
>
> It is possible to span 2 collison domains across 1 VLAN...so
> yes they could be, if it were possible with FreeBSD (?IS it?) to
> put two ethernet cards in this setup:
>
> FreeBSD
> int1 int2
> / \
> / \
> / \
> switch1 switch2
>
> If int1 and int2 were part of the same collision domain, then
> switch1 and switch2 would also be part of the same collosion
> domain and visa versa. This would be pretty cool to see happen,
> essentially making a VLAN switch (with Layer 3 capabilities).
>
>
> Nick Rogness
> - Speak softly and carry a Gigabit switch.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
