[rbridge] A question onhttp://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-trill-routing-reqs-00.txt

[Eastlake III Donald-LDE008]

Silvano,
 
A mantra of the original proposal was "RBridges look like routers to
bridges and look like bridges to routers" so RBridges would drop BPDUs
and, from the point of view of a router an arbitrary mesh of hosts,
bridges, and RBridges looks like one logical link.
 
According to the current proposal, on an RBridge interface, you can
connect other RBridges, bridges, and hosts, assuming the hardware nature
of the interface and physical link allow mutiple access.
 
Donald

________________________________

From: rbridge-bounces at postel.org [mailto:rbridge-bounces at postel.org] On
Behalf Of Silvano Gai
Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2006 10:47 AM
To: rbridge at postel.org
Subject: [rbridge] A question
onhttp://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-trill-routing-reqs-00.t
xt



 

Eric,

 

When you say:

"   In order to simplify the interactions between RBridges and bridges -
   in particular, relative to spanning tree forwarding - RBridges do not
   actively participate in spanning tree protocol with 802.1 bridges. 

"

 

Do you mean:

1)       RBridges propagate BPDUs as normal multicast frames

2)       RBridges drop BPDUs 

 

Also:

On the same RBridge interface, can I connect other RBridges and also
hosts?

 

Thank You

 

-- Silvano

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.postel.org/pipermail/rbridge/attachments/20061030/287beed3/attachment.html