|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
Date: Tue, 05 May 2009 16:44:59 -0400 From: "Durand, Alain" <Alain_Durand@cable.comcast.com> To: "David W. Hankins" <David_Hankins@isc.org>, <nanog@nanog.org> In-Reply-To: <20090505203817.GE3245@isc.org> Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org On 5/5/09 4:38 PM, "David W. Hankins" <David_Hankins@isc.org> wrote: > On Tue, May 05, 2009 at 04:22:04PM -0400, Paul Timmins wrote: >> Sorry for the top post, but as a crazy thought here, why not throw out an >> RA, and if answered, go into transparent bridge mode? Let the sophisticated >> users who want routed behavior override it manually. > > Customer premise gear has a 'front side' and a 'back side', and it is > already well ingrained behaviour for 'back-to-back port chaining' to > create a single large bridged network in the home. What is the > customer's anticipated result from front-to-back chaining? What you really want to avoid is to have customer A's home network accidentally bridged to customer B's. L3 isolation of L2 domains helps. - Alain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |