🚀 go-pugleaf

I don't know why I'm contributing my 2 cents, because I'm an "expert" and
not an Expert.  Maybe some day when I grow up I can be just like....

Sounds to me like most people think of a bridge as protocol transparent at
the data link level.  NO messing with "immediate source addresses."  One
can indeed build a smart bridge that appears to route, but puts the routing
hooks in BELOW the data link information that is provided to higher layers.
On Ethernet, this out-of-band information would have to be implemented as
network management packets communicated between the Bridges.  As I understand
our Ethernet bridge product, it's normal mode of operation is that of a "dumb"
bridge, not a "routing" bridge, so it cannot tolerate cycles and hot standbys
without that net management stuff.

A "bridge" that messes with the data link information to effect routing is
operating at the transport layer, not the data link layer, if I understand
those layer terms.  Shouldn't such a device be called a "router", or perhaps
a "routing bridge"?

I totally agree with Skip's definitions of Repeater and Gateway.
I say again that I'm not an Expert, and further, that I don't recall the
details of optional configurations of our Ethernet bridge product.  Therefore,
I may have misrepresented it.

Greg Waters, DEC/Hudson,MA
...!decvax!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-oracle!waters
"This message will self-destruct in five seconds..."