[MLB-WIRELESS] Bridge vs router vs AP

[Ben Holko]

your linux box would be acting as a router - and forwarding packets as
defined by the routing table, with IP forwarding

at this layer, it doesnt matter that one of the cards is wireless, the ip
stack would just see a packet that needs to get forwarded out an interface -
just like using two "normal" ethernet cards

Ben


Ben Holko
Operations Manager
GlobalCenter
Ph: +61 3 9626 9600
Fax: +61 3 9626 9699
Ben.Holko at GlobalCenter.net.au

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-melbwireless at wireless.org.au
[mailto:owner-melbwireless at wireless.org.au]On Behalf Of Robbie Werner
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 2:55 PM
To: melbwireless at wireless.org.au
Subject: Re: Re[2]: [MLB-WIRELESS] Bridge vs router vs AP


So what would be required on a Linux box to route packets from a wireless
network into a normal wired LAN?

That's what I don't really understand:  Getting the wireless network to talk
to the LAN in a relatively transparent manner.

-Rob


on 30/5/02 2:26 PM, evilbunny at evilbunny at sydneywireless.com wrote:

> Hello Andrew,
>
> An AP is in fact a bridge, which for all intents and purposes is a hub,
> however non IP traffic is filtered by it...
>
> eg, wireless frame headers aren't sent onto the ethernet segment
> and vice versa, bridges have commonly been used in the past to keep
> macintosh and PC networks apart, ie appletalk and MS filesharing
> aren't sent to both parts of the network so as to keep the clutter on
> a network segment to a minimum...


To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo at wireless.org.au
with "unsubscribe melbwireless" in the body of the message




To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo at wireless.org.au
with "unsubscribe melbwireless" in the body of the message