There are valid reasons to do bridging in many cases. Besides it's not very hard to get a router in place.
Small networks bridging don't hurt. Large network (20 or more systems) do NOT bridge but ROUTE.. If you not seen Mikrotik it's a great product. For very little money you can get a EXTREMELY powerful router solution. On small networks simply just bridge to save on cost on larger network put in a router at the right places. I sell a ThinRouter with Mikrotik on it. For $365. It's a 533Mhz unit, 128MB ram, 64MB IDE Flash media, 2 ethernet interfaces. Mikrotik is capable to do routing, policy routing, bridging, rip 1& 2, ospf, bgp. Can be a wireless AP, pppoe server, hotspot server, ntp time server, firewall, dhcp-server, bandwidth manager, voip gatekeeper/gateway/client, bandwidth tests server. And probably a few more things that I forgot to mention. If you would make the AP a router you would have to trade out a lot of features and capabilities or end up spending a LARGE chunk of money on each AP. I would rather have a cheap AP that I can use on ALL installs even the one where I might only have 2-3 clients and allow ME to choose what router I have behind the unit so I can get FULL control of the network. For example if you want to do hotspot authentication or pppoe server authentication heck even dhcp if the AP is the router IT must be the pppoe server/dhcp server or support or support proxying. So no thanks just give me a bridging AP then I will build the network myself and route where I need routing and provide the services I need at the RIGHT place with the "RIGHT" equipment. http://www.fament.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=73 For a direct link to our FEN ThinRouter. Best regards, Eje Gustafsson mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- The Family Entertainment Network http://www.fament.com Phone : 620-231-7777 Fax : 620-231-4066 Mikrotik OEM - Online Store http://www.fament.com/catalog - Your Full Time Professionals - Saturday, July 12, 2003, 9:16:13 PM, you wrote: SM> btw.. one quick rant that's been irritating me (sorry, I've been out in the SM> sun all this week trying to fix sb stuff... I've got a N I C E sun burn... SM> I'm trying to stay calm) SM> Don't take this the wrong way.. You guys are great with wireless... but SM> you suck with IP networks. 20 years ago bridging a network was the only way SM> to do it when you had protocols like DECnet, IPX/SPX, and every other type SM> of out dated system (by today's standards). SM> Cisco has it right.. heck, even Sony has it right... TCP/IP is a ROUTED SM> protocol... IPX/SPX has to be a BRIDGED protocol... NetBEUI, Netbios, etc, SM> etc, etc have to be a bridged protocol... SM> I'm very tired of seeing ARP's from one side of the network end up on the SM> other side. 80% of the trouble shooting you have to do on wireless networks SM> will go away, you'll be able to see where the problem is with a simple SM> traceroute... SM> What I'm getting at... get out of just doing Layer 2.. look at the OSI model SM> and step up to the next step. LOOK AT LAYER 3!!!!! When you give something SM> an IP address.. it's not the "box", "server", "airbridge", whatever that SM> your giving the IP address to.. it's suppose to be the interface that you SM> give the ip address to. SM> So you give the RF interface 192.168.1.24 and the Ethernet interface SM> 192.168.0.24. Ok, you can still have giving the box only one IP address, SM> but make the interface that doesn't get the IP address an SM> alias/clone/whatever of the interface that does get the ip address. SM> If you supported routing... you wouldn't have to care how many MAC addresses SM> are behind the APP, or the AB. The AP would never see the MAC's from behind SM> the AB. Look at the DOCIS standards. SM> Remember.... routing = better throughput, better reliability, not having to SM> worry about bridged "loops", packet storms, etc, etc, etc, etc... SM> Bridging = asking for trouble, worrying about loops, not being able to see SM> anything between you router and CPE. SM> Does everyone keep in mind that old rule... remember that your not suppose SM> to have more than x number of switches between two nodes... otherwise you SM> scream for trouble... SM> You can go ahead and flame me if you want... I'm tired of having headache's SM> of trying to find out where problems are on a BRIDGED network, and trying to SM> figure out how to setup some type of routing and not have to worry about SM> accidentally creating a bridged loop. SM> -----Original Message----- SM> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] SM> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Kevin Summers SM> Sent: Saturday, July 12, 2003 16:05 SM> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] SM> Subject: RE: [smartBridges] Here I come from ETSI land SM> Are there any data sheets or any material to read about some SM> of the details that will be in Nexus? SM> Kevin Summers SM> KISTech Internet Services Inc. SM> www.kistech.com >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Nish Park >> Sent: Saturday, July 12, 2003 11:06 AM >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Subject: RE: [smartBridges] Here I come from ETSI land >> >> >> With the current radio the range can not be lowered below 11.5dB. >> For our new hardware platform Nexus due to be released in Q4 it will be >> possible to do this. >> >> Nish -- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe smartBridges <yournickname> To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type unsubscribe smartBridges) Archives: http://archives.part-15.org
