Subject: Re: Ignore ARP requests from remote buses

From: "Wooten, David" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 14:05:32 -0500

Might I suggest that people are going to build 1394-1394 bridges. It would
be nice if thouse bridges would handle IP between bridges so that people
would not have to also buy a 1394 IP router.

David Wooten

-----Original Message-----
From: Prabhakara Yellai [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 1998 1:09 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Ignore ARP requests from remote buses

Myron,
>
>It sounds like you're suggesting that it is okay if non-IP nodes
>use bridges, but IP devices should never
>use a bridge. If non-IP protocols benefit from a bridge, IP protocols
will
>also benefit from a bridge. This does not make sense to me.

   No. By non-IP protocols I meant, DPP, SBP2, AV/C... As I mentioned
   in one of the emails earlier during the discussion on routers,
   all non-routable protocols are bridged and routable protocols
   are routed. So, if you have IPX or DECnet nodes in your 1394
   network, the box that routes IP can as well route IPX and DECnet.
   So, what I meant was, if you have a 1394 network spanning
   multiple busses, interconnect these busses using a Multiprotocol
   Brouter. Your SBP2, AV/C, DPP devices use the bridge
   functionality of the Multiprotocl Brouter and your IP, IPX, DECnet
   etc devices use the router functionality of the Multiprotocol
   Brouter (assumptions is that this Multiprotocol Brouter has to
   support routing of all the network layer protocols used in
   your network). So, we don't need to resolve the issues that we
   are trying to resolve that stem from assuming that multiple
   busses are interconnected by Bridges. Of course,
   we haven't yet started discussing how IP-multicast works
   in a 1394 network spanning multiple busses. Am I clear?

>
>I don't recall exactly who said what, but if we mandate that IP subnets
>do not span multi-bus links, it does make things simipler. The problem
is
>this precludes IP nodes from taking advantage of 1394 bridges that
>do not use virtual node IDs. (Again, I'm not suggesting anything about
>the future success of virtual node IDs).

   Well, if we mandate that IP subnets do not span multi-bus links,
   I guess, we are trying to redefine Classical IP and OSI Model.
   Aren't we?
>-myron

Prabhakar

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

---

From: Tony Li <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 01:26:02 -0700

> would not have to also buy a 1394 IP router.

Given the apparent complexity of 1394 bridges, it is not at ALL apparent
that one can build one for significantly less money than just building a
1394 based router.

Further, the router basically has NO issues left to work out.

Tony