Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.rmit.EDU.AU!goanna.cs.rmit.EDU.AU!munnari.OZ.AU!spool.mu.edu!pravda.aa.msen.com!news1.best.com!sgigate.sgi.com!enews.sgi.com!lll-winken.llnl.gov!uwm.edu!homer.alpha.net!mvb.saic.com!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!matlock.mindspring.com!usenet From: Robert Sanders <rsanders@mindspring.com> Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc Subject: Re: ISDN for NetBSD Date: 06 Nov 1995 02:38:16 -0500 Organization: MindSpring Enterprises, Inc. Lines: 40 Sender: rsanders@hrothgar.mindspring.com Message-ID: <87razm19cn.fsf@hrothgar.mindspring.com> References: <46gifk$d2n@cousteau.norcen.com> <DH2tFH.GJx@GTS.NET> <47egb7$1bh@cynic.portal.ca> <87lopv86ir.fsf@hrothgar.mindspring.com> <47jbdq$3k0@orion.cc.andrews.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: hrothgar.mindspring.com In-reply-to: gillham@andrews.edu's message of 5 Nov 1995 21:47:38 GMT X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.0.10 On 5 Nov 1995 21:47:38 GMT, gillham@andrews.edu (Andrew Gillham) said: > Uhmm, why would you use RIP at all? A static route entry for the > ethernet, and a default route out the ISDN port, should suffice. Then > all routing decisions are made by the intelligent ISDN router the Ascend > is talking to. Even using multiple ip addresses for the ethernet would > not require RIP, just more static entries. Uhmm, you're right, nobody needs dynamic routing. My mistake. :-) Seriously, in the Internet business it's almost always a mistake to ask "why would you do that?". The person in question almost always has a reason that, while valid, will probably give you nightmares. What you're talking about is barely smarter than a bridge; cisco calls that a "LAN extender". Let's assume that the person with the Pipeline may have multiple Pipelines on his LAN because he has multiple exit points from his LAN, but each destination directly connected by Pipelines is also reachable (via a slightly longer path) through any of the other Pipelines. A dynamic routing protocol sure sounds like the way to handle that. Routing decisions are made at every hop along the path from source to destination. You can't delegate the work to some intelligent router up the road. Even if you could, the most common ISDN hub router nowadays is the Ascend Max, which isn't much smarter than the Pipelines. It acts more like a terminal server than a router. > I'd go one step further and say that for anything serious I would use a > cisco 25xx or better.. :) Ignoring the fact that the thread was more about NetBSD vs. commercial hardware, I think they were somehwat concerned about cost. Both possible 25xx choices (2503I or 2501+TA) are going to be more expensive than an Ascend. And the 2503I doesn't do BONDING or MP, so you only get 64K. But sure, I'd rather have a Cisco 7500 with a PRI sticking out the back. -- Robert -- MindSpring: use us and nobody gets hurt.