[Ns-bugs] [Bug 114] global routing doesn't handle multi-hop layer-2 subnets

[code@nsnam.ece.gatech.edu]

http://www.nsnam.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114





--- Comment #11 from Craig Dowell <craigdo at ee.washington.edu>  2008-11-24 14:30:35 EDT ---
I'm not sure we're communicating well.  You (Tom) wrote:

  The ProcessBridgedBroadcastLink implies that you can have a node which is 
  both a bridge and a router, on the same device.  That is, a NetDevice that 
  is in a bridge group can also be considered as an IP interface for routing
  purposes, if someone assigned an IP address to it.  So, the device can
  forward at layer-2 and router at layer-3?  I'm not sure what behavior that
  might trigger.

A net device in a brige group may not have an IP address associated with it. 
If a node is a router, and has a bridge, the IP interface for routing purposes
is the bridge net device, which is not a net device in a bridge group, unless I
misunderstand the term.

I added an explicit test in ProcessBridgedBroadcastLink to ensure that net
devices in a bridge group (bridge ports in Gustavo's lingo) do not have IP
interfaces.

As it stands now, a node with a router can have a bridge device on it (that may
have a number of associated brige ports).  The router will treat the bridge net
device (not the ports) as an interface routing purposes if the bridge net
device has an IP address.

Is this the behavior okay, or do you want to disallow the bridge net device
with IP address from participating in routing?  If so, I don't really
understand your concern.  Can you elaborate?


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.nsnam.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.