Re: DNS replication on 2 domain on 2 forests
- From: "Herb Martin" <news@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2006 17:16:39 -0600
I did mention that I didn't like to use the word "routing" when it comes
to switched ports, but essentially
And since you both "don't like" it and it is wrong and confusing
it is best not to use the wrong word at all on a subject that
is difficult for most people to understand without first getting
at least the vocabulary correct.
Also, I didn't want to complicate it anymore by introducing layer 3
switches.
Then don't, but then avoid the word routing and stick with
the correct terms: Bridge and bridging.
But since you've mentioned it, yes, these devices are combination devices
that work on multiple layers, and each port can be configured whether as
switched or IP routed.
At the point where you have to deal with this then you must
distinguish layer 3 and layer 2 devices, or functionality within
a single physical device, by using the correct terms.
Generally, it is best to first explain these differences as
separate components, and then (only then) explain that
some switches are bridges, others are routers, and the
most sophisticated are hybrids that allow the administrator
to selectively configure both of these behaviors.
And yes, he needs an IP router, or a Layer 3 Switch. Of course it depends
on what he has to spend. Layer 3 switches are NOT cheap.
Actually he needs to CONFIGURE ROUTING -- but that
could be on a switch, a (pure) router, or even an ALL of
the individual workstations by using explicit manual routes.
The entire discussion of "switches" is largely a distraction
when the ISSUE is routing, but not even necessarily a
"router".
It's a matter of understanding these items at the basic level,
and then keeping it as simple as possible -- but no simpler.
--
Herb Martin, MCSE, MVP
Accelerated MCSE
http://www.LearnQuick.Com
[phone number on web site]
"Ace Fekay [MVP]" <PleaseAskMe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:OZU$pqPGHHA.1912@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In news:OKN2AiGGHHA.1276@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
Herb Martin <news@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> stated, which I commented on below:
What you describe is 'bridging' (Based on MAC) address and
that is what MANY but not all switches do. Routing should NOT
be used to describe these switches. (I.e., Layer 2 switches).
Other switches actually DO "route" and that is the proper term
to use when referring to those switches (layer 3 or router switches.)
And of course some switches do both (usually more expensive and
complex devices.)
You are asking what you need to "route" IP addresses between
different subnets, therefore, the answer is you need a router.
In general he needs a ROUTER (or a switch that is a router)
to route between two different network address ranges.
It is technically possible to do this without an explicit router
by setting every (and every) machine to understand that these
two networks are on the same physical broadcast domain (i.e.,
same actual segment, or bridges segments) but this is an unusual
and perhaps error prone way to do this.
I did mention that I didn't like to use the word "routing" when it comes
to switched ports, but essentially a switch will discern source and
destination MACs and will control the traffic between these two ports to
only these two ports and the rest of the network will not see that
specific traffic. Of course broadcast traffic is sent to all ports.
Also, I didn't want to complicate it anymore by introducing layer 3
switches. But since you've mentioned it, yes, these devices are
combination devices that work on multiple layers, and each port can be
configured whether as switched or IP routed.
And yes, he needs an IP router, or a Layer 3 Switch. Of course it depends
on what he has to spend. Layer 3 switches are NOT cheap.
Ace
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: DNS replication on 2 domain on 2 forests
- From: Ace Fekay [MVP]
- Re: DNS replication on 2 domain on 2 forests
- References:
- DNS replication on 2 domain on 2 forests
- From: Nico2005
- Re: DNS replication on 2 domain on 2 forests
- From: Kevin D. Goodknecht Sr. [MVP]
- Re: DNS replication on 2 domain on 2 forests
- From: Herb Martin
- Re: DNS replication on 2 domain on 2 forests
- From: Nico2005
- Re: DNS replication on 2 domain on 2 forests
- From: Ace Fekay [MVP]
- Re: DNS replication on 2 domain on 2 forests
- From: Herb Martin
- Re: DNS replication on 2 domain on 2 forests
- From: Ace Fekay [MVP]
- DNS replication on 2 domain on 2 forests
- Prev by Date: Re: Is this a split / shadow situation resolving non routable IPs without DNS authourity.
- Next by Date: Re: DNS issue - Windows 2000 ok WinXP not.
- Previous by thread: Re: DNS replication on 2 domain on 2 forests
- Next by thread: Re: DNS replication on 2 domain on 2 forests
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|