Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbatt!ucbvax!MONK.PROTEON.COM!jas
From: jas@MONK.PROTEON.COM.UUCP
Newsgroups: mod.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: ARP, ethernet and starlan
Message-ID: <8702051708.AA09339@monk.proteon.com>
Date: Thu, 5-Feb-87 12:08:17 EST
Article-I.D.: monk.8702051708.AA09339
Posted: Thu Feb  5 12:08:17 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 7-Feb-87 12:46:43 EST
References: <12276567612.70.ROMKEY@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The ARPA Internet
Lines: 15
Approved: tcp-ip@sri-nic.arpa

Ah, the wonderful gifts we have received courtesy of 802.2.

If Starlan is 802.3, then you really "should" use 802.2, the same as
is used for 802.5.  Pile SNAP on top of 802.2, and away you go.  Of
course, this nails the Ethernet 2.0 people, but that's a mess we have
to face.

What ARP hardware type is being used for 802.2/802.5?  Maybe we indeed
should have a 802.2 "hardware" type.

U-B has announced an 802.3/802.5 MAC-level bridge.  It poses a lot of
interesting questions, if anyone from U-B wants to edify us it would
help iron out how we should design 802.2/SNAP/ARP.

Problems like this show the advantages of routers over bridges...