Need to bridge token ring and ethernet
Stuart LeBlanc
migration for a medium size LAN, and will probably have to run both for some
amount of time. Can someone point me in the right direction?
root
Stuart LeBlanc <sleb...@swbno.org> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
GIxm5.16078$dC1....@dfw-read.news.verio.net...
I know everybody in this newsgroup will flame me for this but the best
solution would _NOT_ be a Cisco router but a Olicom Crossfire 8600. Why ?
A Cisco router would not translate from the non-canonical address scheme
used at TokenRing to the canonical used at Ethernet. You will need the
Crossfire 8600 chassis which comes with 2 TokenRing switch ports and insert
a 8660 (2port translational bridging module) module. There is a little
configuration but in most cases the box will work out of the box (no config
changes).
If there is still the need for a Cisco box beware the following: The Cisco
box won't translate between TokenRing and Ethernet so your SNA-Host with the
LAA 4000.1001.6666 will look like the SNA host 0200.0880.6666 in Ethernet
and vice versa. IP will never work because Ethernet station A will arp for
station B in TokenRing and answers it has MAC 4000.1001.4444. So station A
tries to communicate with station B but station A is not seen under MAC
4000.1001.4444 but 0200.0880.2222 and no IP communication will ever ocour.
IPX the same.
The router don't changes something with the frame so the MAC address are all
misinterpreted in the different LAN. The Crossfire will look into the
packets and will _CHANGE_ the frames to match the differnt medium!!
But if you want to _ROUTE_ (you will have a IP subnet for Ethernet and
another one for TokenRing all your IP and IPX packets and set all Ethernet
SNA clients to the changed MAC address of the SNA host you can use the Cisco
box. Notice that the bottleneck isn't the Ethernet side but the 16 Mbit/s of
the TokenRing interface, so a Cisco 2513 or a 2612 should do the job.
Bjoern Steinmann
stei...@netformat.de
Hannover / Germany
(looking for a job in the USA - anyone have one ?)
twin...@mediaone.net
Alittle touchy about cisco running sna? Funny thing cisco bought IBM
networking and I don't know anyone who does sna better than IBM.
If you are looking to run sna over ip you might want to look at
cisco's DLSW+. It works in some pretty big envirorments.
The original question never stated anything about sna, so all that
would be needed is a switch w/token and ethernet ports. Most switches
today are pretty good at changing the mac's around to go from token to
ethernet and back.
The Cat5000 does offer an RJ45 token module. So you would need a
converter to plug in a type-1 cable.
There are plenty of companies in the US (mine included) that sponser
people. But I'm thinking working in Germany sounds better, want to
trade?
Tom Winters
On Wed, 16 Aug 2000 17:14:47 +0200, "root" <ro...@tftp.nordlb.de>
wrote:
Bob Mann
Just a token ring card and a Ethernet one and load RIP, then
drop to DOS and add your routes.
I set up two of these "brouters" on a small network (170
stations) with existing resources. No additional cost.
Just my 2£
--
Bob Mann
rgm...@earthlink.net
root <ro...@tftp.nordlb.de> wrote in message
news:8neb5p$6r0$1...@kilbeggan.xlink.net...
root
I would describe ma as a bridging guru because I changed a completely bridge
based network of a big german bank (400 locations) to a router network using
(guess what) DLSw...
The question asked looked like those questions I often heard and they all
didn't want to route between these both networks just simply bridge.
Thinking to do the right bought a cheap 2513 set it up and wondered why it
isn't working.
I'm not so firm in Cisco switches so it may be possible Cisco already offers
the feature to actually change the frames.
I told about the Crossfire because we use it here and are all happy about it
and it has really a good performance at a low price...
And why do you want to work in Germany ? From my salary I only receive 50%
(rest are taxes and stuff like that), I live in a country that didn't learn
much since the nazi time, telephone (and so the internet) is very expensive
and worst of all a gallon of fuel costs me $5 :-(
<twin...@mediaone.net> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
399ad45b...@nntp.ce.mediaone.net...
> Bjoern,
>
> Alittle touchy about cisco running sna? Funny thing cisco bought IBM
> networking and I don't know anyone who does sna better than IBM.
>
> If you are looking to run sna over ip you might want to look at
> cisco's DLSW+. It works in some pretty big envirorments.
>
> The original question never stated anything about sna, so all that
> would be needed is a switch w/token and ethernet ports. Most switches
> today are pretty good at changing the mac's around to go from token to
> ethernet and back.
>
> The Cat5000 does offer an RJ45 token module. So you would need a
> converter to plug in a type-1 cable.
>
> There are plenty of companies in the US (mine included) that sponser
> people. But I'm thinking working in Germany sounds better, want to
> trade?
>
>
> Tom Winters
> On Wed, 16 Aug 2000 17:14:47 +0200, "root" <ro...@tftp.nordlb.de>
> wrote:
>
> >
frint...@my-deja.com
twin...@mediaone.net wrote:
> Bjoern,
>
> Alittle touchy about cisco running sna? Funny thing cisco bought IBM
> networking and I don't know anyone who does sna better than IBM.
>
> If you are looking to run sna over ip you might want to look at
> cisco's DLSW+. It works in some pretty big envirorments.
>
> The original question never stated anything about sna, so all that
> would be needed is a switch w/token and ethernet ports. Most switches
> today are pretty good at changing the mac's around to go from token to
> ethernet and back.
>
> The Cat5000 does offer an RJ45 token module. So you would need a
> converter to plug in a type-1 cable.
keep this in mind;
A cisco 5XXX series will not convert MACs from token/ethernet. As far
as that goes the token-ring module you describe above, place all of it's
port in it's own VLAN, so translational bridging is not going to happen.
I can't speak of the other cisco switches. Now that I'm really
thinking about it, what other "current" cisco switches offers a
combination of token-ring and ethernet interfaces outside of a the 5K
platform ?
IMHO: so if you need a bridging solution w/cisco ( ethernet--token )
look at some type of brouters or look at another vendor.
just my 0.02
"das glueck"
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Bjoern steinmann
Bjoern
<frint...@my-deja.com> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
8ngn7c$ljg$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
Bjoern steinmann
With what you describe you will have 2 seperate IP networks. But If you want
to have all Ethernet and TokenRing stations in one IP network you'll need to
bridge and even Linux can't do it between Ethernet and TokenRing (not to
speak about NT).
Bob Mann <rgm...@earthlink.net> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
_9Jm5.3219$2l4....@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
Hansang Bae
[snip]
>The original question never stated anything about sna, so all that
>would be needed is a switch w/token and ethernet ports. Most switches
>today are pretty good at changing the mac's around to go from token to
>ethernet and back.
IMHO, briding btn TR and Ethernet is a bad bad bad bad bad idea and
should only be used as a last resort. There are mor pitfalls invovled
than just Big/Little Endian problems. In most POTPIE projects (Pull Out
TokenRing, Put In Ethernet), routing is the way to go.
hsb
"Somehow I imagined this experience would be more rewarding" Calvin
********************************************************************
Due to the volume of email that I receive, I may not not be able to
reply to emails sent to my account. Please post a followup instead.
********************************************************************
twin...@mediaone.net
>In article <399ad45b...@nntp.ce.mediaone.net>,
> twin...@mediaone.net wrote:
>> Bjoern,
>>
>> Alittle touchy about cisco running sna? Funny thing cisco bought IBM
>> networking and I don't know anyone who does sna better than IBM.
>>
>> If you are looking to run sna over ip you might want to look at
>> cisco's DLSW+. It works in some pretty big envirorments.
>>
>> The original question never stated anything about sna, so all that
>> would be needed is a switch w/token and ethernet ports. Most switches
>> today are pretty good at changing the mac's around to go from token to
>> ethernet and back.
>>
>> The Cat5000 does offer an RJ45 token module. So you would need a
>> converter to plug in a type-1 cable.
>
>keep this in mind;
>
> A cisco 5XXX series will not convert MACs from token/ethernet. As far
>as that goes the token-ring module you describe above, place all of it's
>port in it's own VLAN, so translational bridging is not going to happen.
>
> I can't speak of the other cisco switches. Now that I'm really
>thinking about it, what other "current" cisco switches offers a
>combination of token-ring and ethernet interfaces outside of a the 5K
>platform ?
I don't know about other switches, but the 7500 does offer a token
port.
>
>>
>> There are plenty of companies in the US (mine included) that sponser
>> people. But I'm thinking working in Germany sounds better, want to
>> trade?
>>
>> Tom Winters
>> On Wed, 16 Aug 2000 17:14:47 +0200, "root" <ro...@tftp.nordlb.de>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
twin...@mediaone.net
viable solution?
On 17 Aug 2000 16:59:45 GMT, Hansang Bae <hb...@primenet.com.REMOVE>
wrote:
>twin...@mediaone.net writes:
>[snip]
>>The original question never stated anything about sna, so all that
>>would be needed is a switch w/token and ethernet ports. Most switches
>>today are pretty good at changing the mac's around to go from token to
>>ethernet and back.
>
Hansang Bae
>I agree with you bridging is a bad way to go. An RSM in a Cat is that
>viable solution?
That gives you routing via the back plane, so it would be more
preferable than using a router on a stick. I guess cost may bbe an
issue.
twin...@mediaone.net
blade.
On 18 Aug 2000 03:50:32 GMT, Hansang Bae <hb...@primenet.com.REMOVE>
wrote:
>twin...@mediaone.net writes:
David Schwartz
Bjoern steinmann wrote:
>
> Hi Bob,
>
> With what you describe you will have 2 seperate IP networks. But If you want
> to have all Ethernet and TokenRing stations in one IP network you'll need to
> bridge and even Linux can't do it between Ethernet and TokenRing (not to
> speak about NT).
It's not possible in principle, so it's no surprise that Linux can't do
it. Token ring, for example, provides reliable delivery. How do you do
this when bridging TR-to-Ethernet? How do you handle a token ring frame
that exceeds the Ethernet MTU?
As others have said, bridging token ring to ethernet is bad. Things
will break.
DS
Eli
It's possible in principle, and there have even been cases where TR-ETH
bridging was implemented successfully. The recent ones I am aware of used
Cisco IOS translational bridging.
It's true that you have to work cautiously and know what you are doing. So
if your case requires it as a must, consult the SR/TLB (Source Routing
Translational Bridging) documentation in www.cisco.com/tac
- Eli Gal , el...@bezeq.com
- Ramat Gan, Israel
==========
"David Schwartz" <dav...@webmaster.com> wrote in message
news:399EF2B2...@webmaster.com...
Bjoern steinmann
Theoretically the TokenRing station would try to send a 2k or even 4 k big
frame to the desired station - so the Ethernet station would get rubbish.
But most TokenRing protocols will use SNAP (Sub Network Addressing Protocol)
which is designed to get through WAN lines or whatever different media
without fragmentation. The trick is: it will negotiate before main data
communication how big the frame can be.
IPX, NetBEUI and TCP/IP over TokenRing are all using SNAP by default and
will have no problem getting over a translational bridge. But the bridge
will have to translate the TokenRing-SNAP header to Ethernet-SNAP header or
to any else Ethernet header (like Ethernet_II used for IPX and TCP/IP).
SNA is the big problem. But to prevent this IBM delivers most SNA hosting
devices (AS/400, 3174, TIC) with a maximum frame size of 1500 bytes. And
like in SNAP the host defines the used frame size so if you didn't change
your AS/400 (or whatever) settings there will be no problem for Ethernet
clients to talk to TokenRing hosts.
Where I'm working we have over 1000 Ethernet and over 2500 TokenRing
stations in one big NetBEUI, TCP/IP and SNA domain with some translational
switches between them. I know it is big shit to have a L2 structure with
3500 stations attached even if it would only be one medium but it works
really fine and we didn't have to change any client settings. Only the main
TokenRing SNA host needed to be set to a smaller maximum frame size (1500
byte).
So I know the discussion is a more philosophical discussion but there are no
technical problems connecting TokenRing and Ethernet with a translational
bridge!
I know it is generally not a good idea to connect TokenRing and Ethernet via
translational bridges but if you have no other chance you will have to do
so. But you can not do it with a Cisco router without changing the clients
but with a simple IBM 8229 bridge or something more up to date.
Bjoern
David Schwartz <dav...@webmaster.com> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
Hansang Bae
[snip: bridging btn TR and Ethernet (successfully) at a small to
medium size network]
But not *all* places will enjoy your success. I've been to manymany
many clients who do not understand the implications and have run
themselves ragged trying to troubleshoot a problem.
So it's not just philosophical debate. But as you pointed out, some may
never experience major problems. Others may be having a problem and not
realizing it (the network is slow, but that's the way it's always
been.... attitude), or others will go down in flames trying.