brouter - bridging non routable (layer 3?!) addresses - terminology question

brouter - bridging non routable (layer 3?!) addresses - terminology question

NewsGroups | Search | Tools
 comp.dcom.lans.ethernet  Post an article  get this group's latest topics as an RSS feed add this group's latest topics to your My MSN content add this group's latest topics to your My Yahoo content  add this group's latest topics to your Google content  YahooMyWeb Yahoo!  Google Google  Windows Live Favorites Windows Live  del.icio.us del.icio.us  digg digg  Add to Netscape Netscape
Subject Author Date
brouter - bridging non routable (layer 3?!) addresses - terminology question q_q_anonymous 02-28-2006
Posted by Albert Manfredi on March 2, 2006, 10:42 am
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options


q_q_anonymous@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> Albert Manfredi wrote
> > When one says "bridging if it can't route," what that means is that
> > whatever frames arrive with an unknown Layer 3 header, or no Layer 3
> > header at all, remain within the domain of the local Link Layer. In an
> > IP example, that would mean they stay in the same IP subnet as the
> > brouter port on which they arrived. They are switched through the
> > brouter as if this were a bridge, using only the MAC address
> > information, and not forwarded to the port(s) that lead beyond the IP
> > subnet of the port on which these frames arrived.
> >
>
> that sounds very odd.
>
> If the brouter sends the packet back out the interface where it came,
> then preumably, it means it was a mistake for the comp to send it there
> in the first place with that interface's Dest MAC.

Let's say the brouter is acting as a bridge between multiple ports
belonging to one particular IP subnet, and then it has a single port to
another IP subnet somewhere else. Call the distant IP net "Subnet B,"
and the local one "Subnet A."

Any frame arriving at one of the Subnet A ports addressed to a Subnet A
destination will clearly not go to that Subnet B port. It will be
either flooded to all Subnet A ports (e.g. an ARP broadcast), or it
will be switched to a particular Subnet A port which has been
"learned," or it could be multicast to several ports, including
possibly the Subnet B port.

So what happens if a frame with unknown Network Layer address arrives
at one of the Subnet A ports? It can't be sent to the Subnet B port, or
the box wouldn't be much of a router. So I'm saying that frame with
unknown Layer 3 address can be switched to other Subnet A ports of the
brouter, just like any bridge would do, but not to the Subnet B port.

> If the brouter knows the correct MAC then it must have MACs for that
> funny layer 3 protocol, at every interface, for each comp on that
> interface.

How does it "know the correct MAC"? Because presumably it learned the
MAC address by inspecting frames sourced from a particular port. MAC
address xyz lives at port #5, let's say, and this port #5 is one of the
Subnet A ports.

Okay, so now take the legitimate case in which there are two identical
MAC addresses xyz, one in Subnet A and one in that distant Subnet B. If
a frame from one of the other Subnet A ports is addressed to MAC
address xyz, but contains no Layer 3 header, how should the brouter
handle that case?

I'm saying, the brouter simply switches the frame from one Subnet A
port to port #5, which also belongs to Subnet A, but not to the Subnet
B port.

> minor additional point - if by the brouter bridging you mean sending
> back out the same interface , that is very unbridge like. Bridges send
> out a diff interface. They choose the correct interface.

Well ... There's typically no reason to send a layer 2 frame back to
the same port from which it was received. Although this behavior is
certainly possible for a router. Take the case of a router supporting
two IP subnets on the same physical Ethernet. If a frame arrives
addressed to the other IP subnet, the router will take in the frame and
spit it right back out again on the same port on which it was received.

So this too could happen with this brouter, if two IP subnets happen to
live off the same port of the box.

Bert


Posted by on March 2, 2006, 12:56 pm
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options



Albert Manfredi wrote:
> q_q_anonymous@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> > Albert Manfredi wrote
> > > When one says "bridging if it can't route," what that means is that
> > > whatever frames arrive with an unknown Layer 3 header, or no Layer 3
> > > header at all, remain within the domain of the local Link Layer. In an
> > > IP example, that would mean they stay in the same IP subnet as the
> > > brouter port on which they arrived. They are switched through the
> > > brouter as if this were a bridge, using only the MAC address
> > > information, and not forwarded to the port(s) that lead beyond the IP
> > > subnet of the port on which these frames arrived.
> > >
> >
> > that sounds very odd.
> >
> > If the brouter sends the packet back out the interface where it came,
> > then preumably, it means it was a mistake for the comp to send it there
> > in the first place with that interface's Dest MAC.
>
> Let's say the brouter is acting as a bridge between multiple ports
> belonging to one particular IP subnet,

Ohhhh
I didn't realise a Brouter had that.

> and then it has a single port to
> another IP subnet somewhere else. Call the distant IP net "Subnet B,"
> and the local one "Subnet A."
>
> Any frame arriving at one of the Subnet A ports addressed to a Subnet A
> destination will clearly not go to that Subnet B port. It will be
> either flooded to all Subnet A ports (e.g. an ARP broadcast), or it
> will be switched to a particular Subnet A port which has been
> "learned," or it could be multicast to several ports, including
> possibly the Subnet B port.
>
> So what happens if a frame with unknown Network Layer address arrives
> at one of the Subnet A ports? It can't be sent to the Subnet B port, or
> the box wouldn't be much of a router. So I'm saying that frame with
> unknown Layer 3 address can be switched to other Subnet A ports of the
> brouter, just like any bridge would do, but not to the Subnet B port.
>
> > If the brouter knows the correct MAC then it must have MACs for that
> > funny layer 3 protocol, at every interface, for each comp on that
> > interface.
>
> How does it "know the correct MAC"? Because presumably it learned the
> MAC address by inspecting frames sourced from a particular port. MAC
> address xyz lives at port #5, let's say, and this port #5 is one of the
> Subnet A ports.
>
> Okay, so now take the legitimate case in which there are two identical
> MAC addresses xyz, one in Subnet A and one in that distant Subnet B. If
> a frame from one of the other Subnet A ports is addressed to MAC
> address xyz, but contains no Layer 3 header, how should the brouter
> handle that case?
>
> I'm saying, the brouter simply switches the frame from one Subnet A
> port to port #5, which also belongs to Subnet A, but not to the Subnet
> B port.
>


ok!

but then how is that different from a router with a switch connected at
each interface?

I see the logic is slightly different (no deciding if a protocol is
known/routable or not) but the effect is the same.

( I've think of my 'home router' as being like a 2 port router with a
switch at my side so everything hits the switch first. )

> > minor additional point - if by the brouter bridging you mean sending
> > back out the same interface , that is very unbridge like. Bridges send
> > out a diff interface. They choose the correct interface.
>
> Well ... There's typically no reason to send a layer 2 frame back to
> the same port from which it was received. Although this behavior is
> certainly possible for a router. Take the case of a router supporting
> two IP subnets on the same physical Ethernet. If a frame arrives
> addressed to the other IP subnet, the router will take in the frame and
> spit it right back out again on the same port on which it was received.
>
> So this too could happen with this brouter, if two IP subnets happen to
> live off the same port of the box.
>

is there a name for that?

many thanks


Posted by Albert Manfredi on March 2, 2006, 1:48 pm
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options



> but then how is that different from a router with a switch connected
> at
> each interface?

In my view, functionally identical. But all in one box.

>> Take the case of a router supporting
>> two IP subnets on the same physical Ethernet. If a frame arrives
>> addressed to the other IP subnet, the router will take in the frame
>> and
>> spit it right back out again on the same port on which it was
>> received.
>
> is there a name for that?

I've heard it called a "one-armed router." I don't know if there's a
more legit-sounding techie name.

Bert


Posted by on March 2, 2006, 3:12 pm
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options



Albert Manfredi wrote:
>
> > but then how is that different from a router with a switch connected
> > at
> > each interface?
>
> In my view, functionally identical. But all in one box.
>

thanks, can I ask you where you got that as a definition of brouter?

or is there a brouter you used, do you know the model num?


Posted by Albert Manfredi on March 2, 2006, 4:28 pm
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options



> thanks, can I ask you where you got that as a definition of brouter?
>
> or is there a brouter you used, do you know the model num?

It's actually a term I haven't heard used much lately, but years ago it
seemed another one of those buz words people used when they wanted to
pretend they had something unique to sell.

If you search around, you will find the simpilistic definition we've
seen in the thread, such as here:

http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/B/brouter.html

But then if you try to make sense of that, you quickly discover the
definition hardly begins explain what the box must be capable of doing.
So you think it through, and look some more. Aha. Here's one that seems
much more instructive:

http://searchnetworking.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,,sid7_gci211707,00.html

Bert


Similar ThreadsPosted
IP layer and layer 2 IGMP Snooping June 7, 2008, 1:28 am
Ethernet bridging questions May 7, 2006, 12:24 pm
VLAN operation in Transparent bridging July 24, 2005, 11:50 pm
Bridging VLANs on an HP ProCurve 2626 August 31, 2005, 7:27 pm
802.3ad and multiple mac addresses June 4, 2007, 2:25 pm
duplicate MAC addresses November 19, 2007, 6:02 pm
Different treatment for registered and unregistered MAC addresses May 18, 2006, 11:06 pm
MAC addresses in router vs Access Point May 1, 2008, 5:19 am
Layer 2 'Ping' August 15, 2005, 2:22 pm
want to ana;yze the data in MAC layer. January 6, 2006, 12:52 am

other useful resources:
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
Telecommunications Industry Association
Electronic and Software Security Products and Services
International Telecommunication Union

Custom CGI Perl and PHP programming by 1-Script.com

Contact Us | Privacy Policy
The site map in XML format XML site map