Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!ames!pasteur!agate!saturn!eshop From: eshop@saturn.ucsc.edu (Jim Warner) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip Subject: Re: Retix Bridges experiences? Message-ID: <5652@saturn.ucsc.edu> Date: 7 Dec 88 09:31:12 GMT References:<89@stanton.TCC.COM> Reply-To: eshop@saturn.ucsc.edu (Jim Warner) Distribution: comp Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz Lines: 20 In article <89@stanton.TCC.COM> donegan@stanton.TCC.COM (Steven P. Donegan) writes: > >Peter (and others) the answers to your questions are: > >1)They (Retix bridges) are less expensive than DEC LANBRIDGE > units. Their capability is > 100% when doing a black-box/learning bridge function. I have no complaint with the claim of excellent price:performance relative to DEC. The Retix box is good hardware. Users should be aware, however, that DEC bridges run a spanning tree algorithm that allows them to be wired up in an arbitrary topology including loops. Some of the DEC bridges will place themselves in standby mode and only activate themselves if one of the other bridges or links fails. Retix bridges don't run a spanning tree alogrithm and if you inadvertantly form a loop, you'll find out about it in a hurry. :+) jim warner u.c. santa cruz