From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
Message-Id: <199512191749.KAA14759@phaeton.artisoft.com>
Subject: Re: 2 (or more) LAN interface on SAME subnet ?
To: wollman@lcs.mit.edu (Garrett A. Wollman)
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 1995 10:49:44 -0700 (MST)
Cc: terry@lambert.org, freebsd-questions@freefall.freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <9512191615.AA14564@halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu> from "Garrett A. Wollman" at Dec 19, 95 11:15:44 am
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk

> >> This is not true.  The Internet Architecture requires that logical
> >> subnets be fully-connected.  The BSD Architecture requires that every
> >> network interface be connected to a unique subnet.
> 
> > You mean "logical network interface", right?
> 
> No, I don't.  I mean ``network interface driver instance''.
> 
> > Otherwise you're saying you can't use bridges on subnets...
> 
> No, I'm saying that you can use BSD to implement a bridge.

Then you are mixing definitions for "subnets" and "subnet".

If I have a wire named 137.190.32, I can have two wires named
137.190.32 with a bridge between them.

If I have a FreeBSD box as the bridge, then the two network interfaces
are connected to different wires, but the *same* subnet.

I think you mean that you aren't alled to hook two cards in the
same machine to the same wire.  THAT makes sense.


					Terry Lambert
					terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.