Re: Bridge interface and IP address

[Michael Richardson <mcr%sandelman.ca@localhost>]

>>>>> "der" == der Mouse <mouse%Rodents-Montreal.ORG@localhost> writes:
    >>> I ask because it always seemed backwards to me - the bridge
    >>> ouught to be the "higher level" interface,

    der> Actually, I would say the bridge ought not to be an interface
    der> at all.  It's an in-host implementation of what would be done
    der> externally with a switch, and they aren't interfaces.  (Some
    der> (real-hardware) switches can reasonably be said to have
    der> addresses, but it's not the switch itself that has the address;
    der> it's the management computer housed in the same box that has
    der> the address.)

    der> I'm not sure why bridges were implemented as interfaces in
    der> NetBSD.  Convenience of some sort, I suppose.

Well, we need some name for the plug on the side of the computer.

I would argue that it's not interfaces/bridges that is the problem, it's
the fact that "struct ifnet" is associated with an "interface", rather
than with a network (broadcast/ppp) domain (for which, we do not have
any names). 

-- 
]       He who is tired of Weird Al is tired of life!           |  firewalls  [
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works, Ottawa, ON    |net architect[
] mcr%sandelman.ottawa.on.ca@localhost http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/ 
|device driver[
   Kyoto Plus: watch the video <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzx1ycLXQSE>
                       then sign the petition.