On Mon, 2006-01-30 at 04:29, Jeff Vian wrote:
> > > >
> > > An AP is not the same as a hub/switch. It is actually a router.
> >
> > That's kind of confusing. An AP is really more like a switch but
> > connecting the LAN to wireless devices. However it is often
> > integrated into a router which also provides WAN/LAN routing.
> >
> > > In order for the WAN port to be on the same network as the LAN side it
> > > must be able to function in a bridge mode instead of routing.
> >
> > In the router models, the AP normally bridges with the LAN
> > while the WAN is routed.
> >
> On all the different models I have used (D-link, LinkSys, Netgear, among
> others), the LAN (wired and wireless) side is a switch, *not bridged*.
> Lets be sure the proper terminology is used here.
>
> Bridging gives two or more physical ports (usually limited to two) the
> same IP address, and makes it transparent to other machines unless
> something is sent explicitly to that address. The physical network
> segment on both sides is 'bridged' and it becomes one contiguous
> network. Anything addressed to another IP address than the local one is
> simply passed through - totally transparent.
>
> Routing keeps both sides distinct separate networks and only passes
> packets through if they are destined for something on the other side of
> the router.
>
> A switch or hub is simply a connection point on a single network. No
> bridging or routing is involved.
I don't think there is any real difference in a bridge and
any two ports of a switch. Both are transparent repeaters
and allowed to filter by MAC addresses. There might be a
special case in Linux software bridging where the interface
can have a working address associated but in hardware if
a bridge or switch has an address it is just for management.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
