-----Original Message-----
From: Leigh Anne Chisholm [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: February 8, 2001 10:17 AM
To: Jim Dixon
Subject: RE: Another 802.3 and Ethernet Question
Actually, what I'm saying is that John wanted to know whether or not he
should change the default Ethernet frame type from Ethernet_II to Ethernet
802.3. My question was meant to provoke John to understand what the default
frame type is used for--which really is a pre-requisite to be able to
understand what benefits or drawbacks (if any) changing the default frame
type would bring.
Why Ethernet_II is the default frame type likely has to do with the fact
that most packets that don't have a pre-determined Ethernet frame type don't
require the functionality that's inherent within 802.3 or provided by the
inclusion of an 802.2 header. It's a frame type that's supported by the
most antique Ethernet equipment since it's the original Ethernet
specification.
I thought it was also worthy of discussion, because how the default Ethernet
frame type is used by a router differs from IPX in that a router will route
ANY IP Ethernet frame - not just the specified frame type. Comparing IPX
Ethernet frame types to IP frame types is, in my opinion, somewhat akin to
comparing apples and oranges. They're both fruits, but they've got
differences that make each unique and unable to be compared.
In summary, I've found that a small chunk of my brain has been "Howard
Berkowitz-ized" -- or, in other words, the question that came to mind when
John asked if he should change the default Ethernet frame type was... "What
problem is it that you're trying to solve?" And without understanding when
the default Ethernet frame type came into play, he couldn't assess what the
implications of his change would be.
If you don't mind, I'd like to cc this message to the Groupstudy group
(minus this paragraph of course). I think it will help clarify in the minds
of some, exactly what it was that I was trying to get at, and why. And I
think you bring up some interesting points for thought...
-- Leigh Anne
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Dixon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: February 8, 2001 9:07 AM
To: Leigh Anne Chisholm
Subject: RE: Another 802.3 and Ethernet Question
Now, finally it begins to make sense what you were talking about. It was
confusing us a bit.
<I think :) >
You are saying why go to all the trouble of having a dam DEFAULT type if
they will either ignore, drop, or just frigging encapsulate the
(@#*$(@#*&&$-ity-blank-ity packet anyway right?
So your question was not how, or what, by WHY WHY WHY!!! :)
the answer is
It Depends on whom you ask as to what the answer will be.
I suppose it had something to do with 802.3 being the MOST POPULAR with
Novell be prolific earlier on.
Then when they came out with an 802.2 support in what
3.12 < I think > it really showed that they were too proprietary and were
coming around to the unix world's way of thinking.
So I guess since there was always a mish-mash of protocols in networks being
not-upgraded immediately but over time a decision had to be made on which
protocol to support out of the box and how to support the protocols that
were EXTRA on the network.
I think maybe they just did what they had to do instead of what needed to
happen.
So in the end, we have no answers only
I thought, you thought, and we all thinked thanked and thunk about it till
it thunked itself into the future.
Seriously though, thanks for telling us what you had in mind.
have a good day and give your brain a break, you could stop by the Nasa
homepage and watch NASA TV. Atlantis lifted off yesterday at about 17:30
Central time (Successfully) I was a little dissapointed because there was
only a one sentence mention on the news about it but they spent 5 minutes
talking about some wreck that just happened and killed some people.
ANyWAY that's a different argument.
See you
_________________________________
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
