From: Andrei Popescu
Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 10:59:36 +0300
> ... IMVHO, as long as you don't have any compelling reasons to keep
> two networks more or less separate it's just simpler to bridge them.
The subordinate network here is just an Ethernet crossover cable
with the carnot Web server
Hi, Peter:
En fecha Domingo, 15 de Mayo de 2011, peasth...@shaw.ca escribió:
> * From: "Jesús M. Navarro"
> * Date: Sun, 5 Sep 2010 23:47:48 +0200
>
> > There's neither "carnot" nor "Allied Telesis 3612TR" in your provided
> > diagram so it's a bit difficult to follow you. It would be b
On Sb, 14 mai 11, 22:14:44, peasth...@shaw.ca wrote:
>
> What are the greatest advantages in bridging eth0 and eth1 rather
> than routing through Dalton to Carnot? Bridging will need some
> additional software, bridge-utils; routing should be possible
> without adding software.
AFAIK the addi
* From: "Jesús M. Navarro"
* Date: Sun, 5 Sep 2010 23:47:48 +0200
> There's neither "carnot" nor "Allied Telesis 3612TR" in your provided diagram
> so it's a bit difficult to follow you. It would be better if you provided a
> complete an up-to-date diagram.
It's improved now.
htt
From: Chris Bannister
Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2010 23:29:08 +1200
> Well, it is a wiki! If you feel the content is incorrect/misleading
> please correct it.
I understand about wiki documentation but my understanding of
network bridging is superficial. What if I am missing a point
in the wiki pag
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 04:12:47PM -0700, peasth...@shaw.ca wrote:
> From: Jesus_M. Navarro
> Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2010 05:42:40 +0200
> Certainly that is sensible. I was distracted by
> http://wiki.debian.org/BridgeNetworkConnections
> where eth0 and eth1 are both configured before br0 is create
From: Jesus_M. Navarro
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2010 05:42:40 +0200
> What you need it[an address on dalton:eth1] for? You expect dalton's eth1 to
> be
> connected with nothing but carnot by means of a cross-over cable and the
> bridge will already give you IP connectivity between them so no need
Hi:
On Friday 17 September 2010 19:08:20 peasth...@shaw.ca wrote:
> * From: "Jesús M. Navarro"
> * Date: Sun, 5 Sep 2010 23:47:48 +0200
>
> > There's neither "carnot" nor "Allied Telesis 3612TR" in your provided
> > diagram ...
>
> For now I can't find the original to edit and scan.
> If
* From: "Jesús M. Navarro"
* Date: Sun, 5 Sep 2010 23:47:48 +0200
> There's neither "carnot" nor "Allied Telesis 3612TR" in your provided diagram
> ...
For now I can't find the original to edit and scan.
If it doesn't turn up next week, I'll make a fresh diagram.
> * The ISP you c
On Wed, 08 Sep 2010 13:21:58 -0500
Stan Hoeppner wrote:
...
> Considering the cost of the entire switch IC in a $10 USD 8 port switch
> (which includes an external AC/DC transformer and a 3 foot ethernet
> patch cable for the price) is less than $1 in 10k unit quantities, the
> cost of say 64KB
Celejar put forth on 9/7/2010 6:58 PM:
> I suppose, but since the vast majority of applications of cheap
> switches don't require this capability, wouldn't it be cheaper to leave
> it out, and only include it as an extra feature for those who need it?
>
> I don't actually know what it costs them
On Tue, 07 Sep 2010 19:18:49 -0500
John Hasler wrote:
> Celejar writes:
> > I suppose, but since the vast majority of applications of cheap
> > switches don't require this capability, wouldn't it be cheaper to
> > leave it out, and only include it as an extra feature for those who
> > need it?
>
Celejar writes:
> I suppose, but since the vast majority of applications of cheap
> switches don't require this capability, wouldn't it be cheaper to
> leave it out, and only include it as an extra feature for those who
> need it?
They have to have a MAC table and with current technology it costs
On Tue, 07 Sep 2010 00:04:42 -0500
Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> Celejar put forth on 9/6/2010 8:42 PM:
>
> > I'm curious; especially for the cheap switches, why would they need to
> > store so many MAC addresses? What's the use case for a cheap switch
> > actually seeing thousands of MACs since 'boot
On Tuesday, September 07, 2010 10:13:51 you wrote:
>> Original Message
>>From: b...@iguanasuicide.net
>>>In <380-2201091623840...@netptc.net>, ow...@netptc.net wrote:
I'm not disagreeing with you in practice but many years ago these
WERE the definitions the ITU and ISO dealt with.
>
>
>
> Original Message
>From: jesus.nava...@undominio.net
>To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
>Subject: Re: Re (2): Linux hub
>Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2010 16:10:55 +0200
>
>>Hi, owens:
>>
>>On Tuesday 07 September 2010 01:08:40 ow...@netptc.net wrote
>
>
>
> Original Message
>From: b...@iguanasuicide.net
>To: ow...@netptc.net
>Subject: Re: Re (2): Linux hub
>Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2010 18:45:33 -0500
>
>>In <380-2201091623840...@netptc.net>, ow...@netptc.net wrote:
>>>> Original Message
Hi, owens:
On Tuesday 07 September 2010 01:08:40 ow...@netptc.net wrote:
[...]
> Boyd
> I'm not disagreeing with you in practice but many years ago these
> WERE the definitions the ITU and ISO dealt with. IIRC it was the
> vendors who screwed things up by introducing such products as
> "swithcin
Celejar put forth on 9/6/2010 8:42 PM:
> I'm curious; especially for the cheap switches, why would they need to
> store so many MAC addresses? What's the use case for a cheap switch
> actually seeing thousands of MACs since 'boot'?
Scenario: I work for a huge company that has 7,000 employees in
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. put forth on 9/6/2010 6:16 AM:
> But,
> they are still "smart" devices when compared to a hub, cable, repeater, or
> other device that operates with no internal state.
Agreed in that "smart" here simply means the device looks at the content
of a frame, specifically the tar
On Mon, 06 Sep 2010 00:43:38 -0500
Stan Hoeppner wrote:
...
> A traditional el cheapo desktop 8 port ethernet switch, such as the $10
> Rosewill 10/100 switch on my desk, has a single simple 8x8 crossbar
> switch ASIC, enough RAM to store 8192 MAC addresses, and possibly a
...
> The larger swit
In <380-2201091623840...@netptc.net>, ow...@netptc.net wrote:
>> Original Message
>>From: b...@iguanasuicide.net
>>>In <380-22010905162433...@netptc.net>, ow...@netptc.net wrote:
> Original Message
>From: peasth...@shaw.ca
>>From: "PT M."
>>Quoting from http:/
>
>
>
> Original Message
>From: b...@iguanasuicide.net
>To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
>Subject: Re: Re (2): Linux hub
>Date: Sun, 5 Sep 2010 14:56:53 -0500
>
>>In <380-22010905162433...@netptc.net>, ow...@netptc.net wrote:
>>>>---
In <4c847f8a.3060...@hardwarefreak.com>, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>Layer 2 ethernet switches, the bulk of all sold to date, don't have any
>knowledge of "packets". They don't store information about "seen
>packets".
>
>Packets exist at layer 3 in OSI.
Sorry, I was overusing the term "packet". I was
Rick Thomas put forth on 9/5/2010 10:51 PM:
> Does Spanning Tree Protocol and/or V-lan tagging count as "out-of-band
> information"?
Yes. As does L2TP, L2QOS, port mirroring, link aggregation (channel
bonding), etc, etc.
--
Stan
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.o
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. put forth on 9/5/2010 2:56 PM:
> Switches are smart devices, but not traditionally programmable. They do use
> some RAM to store information about seen packets in order to make decisions
> about future packets.
Ethernet switches are not "smart" devices at all, unless you
On Sunday, September 05, 2010 22:51:16 you wrote:
>Thanks for the informative discussion!
>
>On Sep 5, 2010, at 3:56 PM, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
>> Switches are smart devices, ... They do not use out-of-band
>> information to make
>> switching decisions.
>
>Does Spanning Tree Protocol and/or
Thanks for the informative discussion!
On Sep 5, 2010, at 3:56 PM, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
Switches are smart devices, ... They do not use out-of-band
information to make
switching decisions.
Does Spanning Tree Protocol and/or V-lan tagging count as "out-of-band
information"?
Ri
Hi:
On Sunday 05 September 2010 17:14:34 peasth...@shaw.ca wrote:
> From: Andrei Popescu
> Date: Sun, 05 Sep 2010 09:08:04 +0300
>
> > AFAICT, what you ask for is a gateway/router. Here is a very short
> > tutorial: ...
>
> Thanks. http://carnot.yi.org/NetworksPage.html shows that dalton
> and j
In <380-22010905162433...@netptc.net>, ow...@netptc.net wrote:
>> Original Message
>>From: peasth...@shaw.ca
>>>From:"PT M."
>>>Quoting from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_switch,
>>>"Switches may operate at one or more OSI layers, including physical,
>>>data link, network,
From: Stan Hoeppner
Date: Sun, 05 Sep 2010 13:28:13 -0500
> What exactly are you trying to accomplish? What is your goal here?
Discussed extensively with Bob Proulx over the recent few
days. Open this page.
http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2010/09/author.html
Links are visible under
In <171056613.33698.296...@heaviside.invalid>, peasth...@shaw.ca wrote:
>A salient detail is that
>carnot has a public address whereas a masqueraded machine under
>a router typically has a private address.
Masquerading is not a required part of routing. While NAT and similar
masquerading technol
peasth...@shaw.ca put forth on 9/4/2010 11:48 PM:
> Does anyone know of documentation for a Linux hub or a Linux
> switch? The simplest example I can think of is a system with
> a gateway interface transmitting packets for multiple addresses
> and subordinate interfaces transmit
>
>
>
> Original Message
>From: peasth...@shaw.ca
>To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
>Subject: RE: Re (2): Linux hub
>Date: Sun, 5 Sep 2010 08:44:00 -0700
>
>>From: "PT M."
>>Date: Sun, 05 Sep 2010 13:58:26 +0800
>>> Switch/Hub
From: "PT M."
Date: Sun, 05 Sep 2010 13:58:26 +0800
> Switch/Hub is not those things and OS thould do, Switch work at the layer of
> Link, ...
Quoting from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_switch,
"Switches may operate at one or more OSI layers, including physical,
data link, network,
From: William Cooper
Date: Sun, 05 Sep 2010 02:26:00 -0400
> ... Debian machine with 5 nics as a switch between multiple network segments
> ...
> ...
> http://www.linuxfoundation.org/collaborate/workgroups/networking/bridgelooks
That should be helpful. Thanks, ... Peter E.
--
VoIP
From: Ariel_Lagan
Date: Sun, 05 Sep 2010 03:10:23 -0300
> I don't know if it's possible to make a hub with multiples NICs using
> Linux, ...
My intuition is that a Linux hub is possible but inept. A Linux
switch should work on the same hardware and be more efficient.
I
From: Andrei Popescu
Date: Sun, 05 Sep 2010 09:08:04 +0300
> AFAICT, what you ask for is a gateway/router. Here is a very short
> tutorial: ...
Thanks. http://carnot.yi.org/NetworksPage.html shows that dalton
and joule have been performing this function for some time; years
in fact. The
On 5 September 2010 00:48, wrote:
> Does anyone know of documentation for a Linux hub or a Linux
> switch? The simplest example I can think of is a system with
> a gateway interface transmitting packets for multiple addresses
> and subordinate interfaces transmitting packets fo
multiple NICs (you can also bridge virtual interfaces
like Xen, but I don't think that's what you're looking for). Once you've
installed the package, you need to use the command "brctl" to create and
configure the bridge.
Greetings!
On 09/05/2010 01:48 AM, peasth
On Sb, 04 sep 10, 21:48:16, peasth...@shaw.ca wrote:
> Does anyone know of documentation for a Linux hub or a Linux
> switch? The simplest example I can think of is a system with
> a gateway interface transmitting packets for multiple addresses
> and subordinate interfaces transmit
Does anyone know of documentation for a Linux hub or a Linux
switch? The simplest example I can think of is a system with
a gateway interface transmitting packets for multiple addresses
and subordinate interfaces transmitting packets for one or all
addresses except for the address of the
42 matches
Mail list logo
