Great Circle Associates Firewalls
(February 1997)
 

Indexed By Date: [Previous] [Next] Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject: Re:Routing vs IP forwarding (was FW Solaris and routing)
From: Chris Lonvick <clonvick @ cisco . com>
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 07:33:05 -0600
To: Ryan Russell/SYBASE <Ryan . Russell @ sybase . com>, Kenneth kron <kenneth_kron @ INS . COM>
Cc: Jerald Josephs <Jerald . Josephs @ Ebay . Sun . COM>, "Ryan.Russell" <Ryan . Russell @ sybase . com>, firewalls <firewalls @ GreatCircle . COM>, fw-1-mailinglist <fw-1-mailinglist @ us . checkpoint . com>

Hi All,

The initial device (the one that first sends the packet), will usually 
place a Time To Live (TTL) value of 64 in the IP header.  

o  If the the next device decrements this value as it sends it out an 
interface, then it is a "router" and the packet has been routed.

o  If the next device passes the packet through without modifications 
to the IP header, then it is a "bridge" and the packet has been bridged.
(Canonical/non-canonical changes are not considered to be modifications 
in this context.)

o  If the next device does something different than either of these, 
then, we at Cisco call it a "potential acquisition".  ;-)

Hope this helps,

Chris Lonvick
Cisco Systems
Consulting Engineering
Houston, Texas, USA
+1-713-778-5663


---bunch-o-stuff deleted for brevity---

At 01:32 PM 2/24/97 EDT, Ryan Russell/SYBASE wrote:

>For those who must be getting tired of the arguement, again:
>
>One of my Sun's that runs Firewall-1 will, with IP Forwarding enabled,


Indexed By Date Previous: RE: Re[2]: sendmail and many domain
From: Greg Witte <gwitte @ us-state . gov>
Next: tac_plus and authentication
From: Jean Chess <jchess @ telerama . lm . com>
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re:Routing vs IP forwarding (was FW Solaris and routing)
From: Paul Ferguson <pferguso @ cisco . com>
Next: SATAN mailing list interest?
From: "Ferrell-1, Ema" <Eman . Ferrell-1 @ kmail . ksc . nasa . gov>

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com