[186384] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: reliably detecting the presence of a bridge?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Matthew Kaufman)
Tue Dec 15 09:46:58 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Matthew Kaufman <matthew@matthew.at>
In-Reply-To: <CAA93jw6LXBpSfXcF2PgqrLjQ53bOdwXErHZNpjMpmEJ-N7FKVw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2015 10:46:51 -0400
To: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Why do you care if there's a bridge? Seems you care about higher latency, pa=
cket loss, lower reliability, etc. Measure what matters and act on that, rat=
her than trying to guess performance from link type.
Matthew Kaufman
(Sent from my iPhone)
> On Dec 15, 2015, at 5:48 AM, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:
>=20
> I am curious if there is some sort of igmp or other form of message
> that would reliably detect if a switch had a bridge on it. How could
> deviceA detect deviceC was a bridge in this case?
>=20
> deviceA -> ethernet switch -> deviceB
> ethernet switch -> deviceC with bridged wifi and ethern=
et
>=20
> question came up in the context of:
>=20
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/babel-users/2015-December/002231.=
html
>=20
> --
> Dave T=C3=A4ht
> Let's go make home routers and wifi faster! With better software!
> https://www.gofundme.com/savewifi
