| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 1220.1 | More info please | JUMP4::JOY | Perception is reality | Thu Feb 03 1994 14:04 | 8 |
| Fung Siong,
CAn you give some background to what the customer envirnment is
like? In some cases a bridge is better and in others a router. Its not
clear cut that one is always better than the other.
Regards,
Debbie
|
| 1220.2 | Config, Perf., Price Consideration, I think? | ZPOVC::DAIV01::FUNGSIONG | Digital Indonesia - Networks | Thu Feb 03 1994 20:51 | 13 |
| Hi Deb,
If the requirements if to connect Ethernet workgroups, which has IPX,
DECnet, and TCP/IP protocols to a FDDI campus backbone, what do you
think? I think this is quite simple. I believe it has something to do
with the bridge spanning tree algorithm which might be complicated to
design (for complex networks); whereas routers have flexibility because
of its intelligence. However, performance-wise bridge is usually faster.
(and price-wise, cheaper).
Thanks for your advise,
Fung Siong
|
| 1220.3 | FYI: spanning tree | BIGBAD::GULICK | Those dirty rings !! | Fri Feb 04 1994 12:41 | 5 |
| The bridge spanning tree algorithm requires no manual configuration no matter
how complex the topology; Digital bridges plug & play. Routers,on the other hand,
do usually require a fair amount of work to set up (network address,etc).
-tom
|
| 1220.4 | Bridge for simple requirement, then? | ZPOVC::DAIV01::FUNGSIONG | Digital Indonesia - Networks | Sun Feb 06 1994 21:04 | 14 |
| RE: -1
Can I put it this way: For Ethernet to FDDI connectivity only,
FDDI-to-Ethernet bridge (eg DECbridge 900MX) is simpler and better?
What is the advantage of choosing a router over a bridge, then?
BTW, our DECbridge 900MX is "router-ready" by s/w upgrade, so my choice
will not be an issue.
Sorry if this question is too basic :-).
Best Regards,
Fung Siong
|
| 1220.5 | | KONING::KONING | Paul Koning, B-16504 | Mon Feb 07 1994 12:03 | 18 |
| Multicast and broadcast messages are forwarded to all ports by a bridge
(unless you use filtering, which is very tricky and something to avoid if
you don't absolutely have to have it). If you have a very large network,
the multicast traffic can become quite a large fraction of the total.
Routers do not forward multicast/broadcast (at least not for the protocols
that are being routed). So in large networks, you can reduce the amount of
overhead. The price you pay is that it takes more work to set up and manage
a network of routers. An additional issue is that, for given hardware, routing
is somewhat slower than bridging.
So if your network is not all that big -- say, a few hundred nodes -- bridging
is almost certainly the best answer. If your network has thousands of nodes,
it may be that routing is what you'd want to use. As you said, the 900 MX
will give you both, so if the answer isn't clear, you could use bridging now
and consider later whether you should move to routing.
paul
|