Subject: [rbridge] VLAN tag for the encapsulated packets

From: Eric.Gray at marconi.com (Gray, Eric)
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 16:48:55 -0500

Saikat,

	Yes, but that just moves the question into the past.

	To have an entry that timed out, there must exist some 
form of connectivity - at least if the entry was correct for
the current scenario.  It is possible that the network has 
changed, but that's similar to saying it's possible a host 
was turned off - i.e. - the network may be disfunctional as 
far as some specific device is concerned.

	Assuming that there is a functional network connection
between RBridges R1 and R2, then either they are part of the 
same broadcast domain (hence flooding works) or they are not
(hence routing is necessarily involved).

	Barring a change in network topology that shifts the
relationship from one scenario to the other, then the fact
that a forwarding entry was obtainable previously means an
entry will be obtainable again.

	If there was a significant topology change, then 
other mechanisms will be involved.

--
Eric

--> -----Original Message-----
--> From: Saikat Ray [mailto:saikat at seas.upenn.edu] 
--> Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 3:18 PM
--> To: 'Gray, Eric'
--> Cc: 'Developing a hybrid router/bridge.'; 'Radia Perlman'
--> Subject: RE: [rbridge] VLAN tag for the encapsulated packets
--> 
--> > Why would this happen?  Some frame sender, somewhere, has to
--> > know that R2 exists or it would not have sent a frame to R2.
--> 
--> There is an aging mechanism on the legacy bridge entries. 
--> It is perfectly possible that the forwarding entry had 
--> been deleted.
-->