From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <d295ea7675917a51619adc3bd5875b56@coraid.com>
From: erik quanstrom <quanstro@coraid.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 07:42:52 -0400
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] plan 9 bridging
In-Reply-To: <1055b16f0706182034t581f9effr3bfd126fd5b7ba62@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 8170c98c-ead2-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

> ok, i'm still not sure what you're trying to do but thought i'd
> mention that bridge(3) is not something that implements an "Ethernet
> bridge" as in ANSI/IEEE 802.1d

i don't have the 802.1d standard.  i can imagine the mss business isn't
standard and it seems a real bridge needs to participate in spanning-tree
stuff.  is there anything else a bridge must do?

i just want to be able to keep traffic counters &c between two hosts connected
back-to-back.  i think bridge(3) provides more than i need, but i might be
missing something.

- erik