Subject: Re: R: arp.
To: andrea <>
From: I. Souvatzis <>
List: tech-net
Date: 04/06/1999 13:07:39
On Tue, Apr 06, 1999 at 12:46:23PM +0200, andrea wrote:
> -From: Crist J. Clark <>
> >[1] The Secondary Router would not actually be doing routing in this
> >case. It's acting more like a switch. You did not really tell us why
> >you are doing this. Would getting a switch be a better option for you?
> Tell me more about this.
> What do you mean for 'switch' exactly?
> Can a unix-box be configured like a switch ?

Let me rephrase his question.

"Why do you have the secondary router at all?"