Mouse <mouse%Rodents-Montreal.ORG@localhost> writes: >>> Maybe "network interface" is not the right abstraction for bridges >>> to be instances of, then? (Though, at least in my experience, >>> NetBSD's "bridge" interfaces are more like switches than bridges.) >> A switch is a bridge with more than two ports. I can buy that definition. > Then what is my 8-port 10Mb hub? Switch, bridge, neither? It has no > buffering and it always floods all traffic - traffic from port A to a > machine on port B at the same time as traffic from port C to a machine > on port D will produce a collision. This means it is not a switch as > I've used the term throughout my career (well, throughout after the > point when devices smart enough to send unicast traffic to only the > appropriate port appeared). But it has eight - more than two - ports. Neither. It's a hub, which retransmits L1 without decoding L2. > I also own an AUI multiport transceiver box that's basically the same > thing, but AUI instead of twisted-pair - it has eight connectors which > present AUI transceiver interfaces (for connection to hosts) and one > which presents an AUI host interface (for connection to a transceiver). > > Is it a bridge, a switch, neither, what? Why? basically a hub. Interesting - I never heard of that.
Description: PGP signature