On Wed, 2010-01-13 at 07:47 -0800, Bill Prince wrote:
> I realize that MT has essentially abandoned 3.x, but I've been reading
> of numerous issues with 4.x.
>
> We currently have _no_ 4.x deployed in production.
>
> Is that the general consensus, or are you folks jumping into 4.x with
> both
On Thu, 2010-01-14 at 14:05 -0600, Mark McElvy wrote:
> I am moving my servers to a new location in the same building. I only
> have 2 Ethernet runs from the current room to the new. I also have
> several networks to move. What would it hurt to have several different
> IP networks traveling across
stems, Inc.
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:<http://www.butchevans.com/pipermail/mikrotik/attachments/20100114/a07b5a1d/attachment.html>
___
Mikrotik mailing list
Mikrotik@mail.butchevans.com
http://ww
Most switches operate at the data link layer and therefore don't know about
layer 3 issues like IP addresses.
Your IP packets would be encapsulated in a frame with only MAC addresses being
known to the switch.
So having said all this I don't think you will have an issue.
--
Regards
Hilton J
, 10.25.1.x and 172.22.1.x and 172.22.255.x all plugged
into the same switch?
Mark McElvy
AccuBak Data Systems, Inc.
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://www.butchevans.com/pipermail/mikrotik/attachments/20100114/a07b5a1d/attachment.h
It was the policies. They all ran this morning.
-Original Message-
From: mikrotik-boun...@mail.butchevans.com
[mailto:mikrotik-boun...@mail.butchevans.com] On Behalf Of Hilton J
Ralphs
Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 11:31 PM
To: Mikrotik discussions
Subject: Re: [Mikrotik] Script not ru
6 matches
Mail list logo
