good points, Scott. Down there at the end I've added a couple of my own experiences in the real world.
""s vermill"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > mlehr wrote: > > > > I have studied for and successfully tested CCNA & CCNP and now > > I am studying > > for the CCIE written exam. At this point in my studies, I am > > reading up on > > the subject of Bridging. I fully understand the concept of > > bridging when it > > comes to switches, but I am perplexed as to why a router would > > need to > > perform a bridging function. Obviously bridging capabilities > > are built into > > the routers IOS but what need would prompted anyone to use this > > feature. In > > the other studies Bridging was not a covered subject so this is > > new > > territory for me. > > > > Just to give you a specific example that builds on Priscilla's reply: > > This past summer I had a client who had hired me to do the WAN stuff for an > international network and another contractor to install some telephone > switches. The switches were to be managed via an out-of-band IP network. > The folks back at the factory had configured every one of the switch > management IPs to be in the same subnet. Problem was, no one could figure > out how to change the IPs in the field and extensive documentation and > training material had already been produced. So I saved the day by > eliminating the static routes and setting up a bridge group (don't ask how > the change in router configs affected the documentation -- I didn't ask and > no one fessed up). So it's sometimes an unintentional patch. What's more, > even if they had done this on purpose, I don't think Cisco sells bridges > anymore. So a router with a bridge group still would have been required. > two real world situations. In my days at The Brokerage Firm, we were an IPX network. Our quote vendor did not route IPX from their quote servers. I had a small branch office thrust upon me ( a single broker and his sales assistant ) It was not cost effective to provide them with their own quote server, so I bridged to that site so they could share the home office quote server. The cost benefit analysis gave me a payback in a relatively short time. these days, I sell a number of small office RLAN's ( DSL at the remote, ATM at the central site ) In a network where there are only 10 people in the central site and 3-5 people in the remote sites, it is not worth my trouble to route. People use static IP's and generaly use their ISP for company e-mail. So I bridge a network like this. The data flow supposrts this, and since the operations are not very sophisticated, and the customers generally without a lot of cash for sophisitcated servers and services, it works out well. ( Yes there is a firewall in place at the central site ) > > > > > > Help! > > > > Mike L. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=60562&t=60546 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
