Dealing with multiple clients

CSMA/CD shared medium Ethernet

Ethernet originally used a shared coaxial cable (the shared medium) winding around a building or campus to every attached machine. A scheme known as carrier sense multiple access with collision detection (CSMA/CD) governed the way the computers shared the channel. This scheme was simpler than the competing token ring or token bus technologies. When a computer wanted to send some information, it used the following algorithm:

Main procedure

1. Frame ready for transmission.
2. Is medium idle? If not, wait until it becomes ready and wait the interframe gap period (9.6 µs in 10 Mbit/s Ethernet).
3. Start transmitting.
4. Did a collision occur? If so, go to collision detected procedure.
5. Reset retransmission counters and end frame transmission.

Collision detected procedure

1. Continue transmission until minimum packet time is reached (jam signal) to ensure that all receivers detect the collision.
2. Increment retransmission counter.
3. Was the maximum number of transmission attempts reached? If so, abort transmission.
4. Calculate and wait random backoff period based on number of collisions.
5. Re-enter main procedure at stage 1.

This can be likened to what happens at a dinner party, where all the guests talk to each other through a common medium (the air). Before speaking, each guest politely waits for the current speaker to finish. If two guests start speaking at the same time, both stop and wait for short, random periods of time (in Ethernet, this time is generally measured in microseconds). The hope is that by each choosing a random period of time, both guests will not choose the same time to try to speak again, thus avoiding another collision. Exponentially increasing back-off times (determined using the truncated binary exponential backoff algorithm) are used when there is more than one failed attempt to transmit.

Computers were connected to an Attachment Unit Interface (AUI) transceiver, which was in turn connected to the cable (later with thin Ethernet the transceiver was integrated into the network adapter). While a simple passive wire was highly reliable for small Ethernets, it was not reliable for large extended networks, where damage to the wire in a single place, or a single bad connector, could make the whole Ethernet segment unusable. Multipoint systems are also prone to very strange failure modes when an electrical discontinuity reflects the signal in such a manner that some nodes would work properly while others work slowly because of excessive retries or not at all (see standing wave for an explanation of why); these could be much more painful to diagnose than a complete failure of the segment. Debugging such failures often involved several people crawling around wiggling connectors while others watched the displays of computers running a ping command and shouted out reports as performance changed.

Since all communications happen on the same wire, any information sent by one computer is received by all, even if that information is intended for just one destination. The network interface card interrupts the CPU only when applicable packets are received: the card ignores information not addressed to it unless it is put into "promiscuous mode". This "one speaks, all listen" property is a security weakness of shared-medium Ethernet, since a node on an Ethernet network can eavesdrop on all traffic on the wire if it so chooses. Use of a single cable also means that the bandwidth is shared, so that network traffic can slow to a crawl when, for example, the network and nodes restart after a power failure.

Ethernet repeaters and hubs

For signal degradation and timing reasons, coaxial Ethernet segments had a restricted size which depended on the medium used. For example, 10BASE5 coax cables had a maximum length of 500 meters (1,640 ft). Also, as was the case with most other high-speed buses, Ethernet segments had to be terminated with a resistor at each end. For coaxial-cable-based Ethernet, each end of the cable had a 50-ohm resistor attached. Typically this resistor was built into a male BNC or N connector and attached to the last device on the bus, or, if vampire taps were in use, to the end of the cable just past the last device. If termination was not done, or if there was a break in the cable, the AC signal on the bus was reflected, rather than dissipated, when it reached the end. This reflected signal was indistinguishable from a collision, and so no communication would be able to take place.

A greater length could be obtained by an Ethernet repeater, which took the signal from one Ethernet cable and repeated it onto another cable. If a collision was detected, the repeater transmitted a jam signal onto all ports to ensure collision detection. Repeaters could be used to connect segments such that there were up to five Ethernet segments between any two hosts, three of which could have attached devices. Repeaters could detect an improperly terminated link from the continuous collisions and stop forwarding data from it. Hence they alleviated the problem of cable breakages: when an Ethernet coax segment broke, while all devices on that segment were unable to communicate, repeaters allowed the other segments to continue working - although depending on which segment was broken and the layout of the network the partitioning that resulted may have made other segments unable to reach important servers and thus effectively useless.

People recognized the advantages of cabling in a star topology, primarily that only faults at the star point will result in a badly partitioned network, and network vendors started creating repeaters having multiple ports, thus reducing the number of repeaters required at the star point. Multiport Ethernet repeaters became known as "Ethernet hubs". Network vendors such as DEC and SynOptics sold hubs that connected many 10BASE2 thin coaxial segments. There were also "multi-port transceivers" or "fan-outs". These could be connected to each other and/or a coax backbone. The best-known early example was DEC's DELNI. These devices allowed multiple hosts with AUI connections to share a single transceiver. They also allowed creation of a small standalone Ethernet segment without using a coaxial cable.

A twisted pair CAT-3 or CAT-5 cable is used to connect 10BASE-T Ethernet

Ethernet on unshielded twisted-pair cables (UTP), beginning with StarLAN and continuing with 10BASE-T, was designed for point-to-point links only and all termination was built into the device. This changed hubs from a specialist device used at the center of large networks to a device that every twisted pair-based network with more than two machines had to use. The tree structure that resulted from this made Ethernet networks more reliable by preventing faults with (but not deliberate misbehavior of) one peer or its associated cable from affecting other devices on the network, although a failure of a hub or an inter-hub link could still affect lots of users. Also, since twisted pair Ethernet is point-to-point and terminated inside the hardware, the total empty panel space required around a port is much reduced, making it easier to design hubs with lots of ports and to integrate Ethernet onto computer motherboards.

Despite the physical star topology, hubbed Ethernet networks still use half-duplex and CSMA/CD, with only minimal activity by the hub, primarily the Collision Enforcement signal, in dealing with packet collisions. Every packet is sent to every port on the hub, so bandwidth and security problems aren't addressed. The total throughput of the hub is limited to that of a single link and all links must operate at the same speed.

Collisions reduce throughput by their very nature. In the worst case, when there are lots of hosts with long cables that attempt to transmit many short frames, excessive collisions can reduce throughput dramatically. However, a Xerox report in 1980 summarized the results of having 20 fast nodes attempting to transmit packets of various sizes as quickly as possible on the same Ethernet segment.^[4] The results showed that, even for the smallest Ethernet frames (64B), 90% throughput on the LAN was the norm. This is in comparison with token passing LANs (token ring, token bus), all of which suffer throughput degradation as each new node comes into the LAN, due to token waits.

This report was wildly controversial, as modeling showed that collision-based networks became unstable under loads as low as 40% of nominal capacity. Many early researchers failed to understand the subtleties of the CSMA/CD protocol and how important it was to get the details right, and were really modeling somewhat different networks (usually not as good as real Ethernet.

Bridging and switching

While repeaters could isolate some aspects of Ethernet segments, such as cable breakages, they still forwarded all traffic to all Ethernet devices. This created practical limits on how many machines could communicate on an Ethernet network. Also as the entire network was one collision domain and all hosts had to be able to detect collisions anywhere on the network the number of repeaters between the farthest nodes was limited. Finally segments joined by repeaters had to all operate at the same speed, making phased-in upgrades impossible.

To alleviate these problems, bridging was created to communicate at the data link layer while isolating the physical layer. With bridging, only well-formed packets are forwarded from one Ethernet segment to another; collisions and packet errors are isolated. Bridges learn where devices are, by watching MAC addresses, and do not forward packets across segments when they know the destination address is not located in that direction.

Prior to discovery of network devices on the different segments, Ethernet bridges and switches work somewhat like Ethernet hubs, passing all traffic between segments. However, as the switch discovers the addresses associated with each port, it only forwards network traffic to the necessary segments improving overall performance. Broadcast traffic is still forwarded to all network segments. Bridges also overcame the limits on total segments between two hosts and allowed the mixing of speeds, both of which became very important with the introduction of Fast Ethernet.

Early bridges examined each packet one by one using software on a CPU, and some of them were significantly slower than hubs (multi-port repeaters) at forwarding traffic, especially when handling many ports at the same time. In 1989 the networking company Kalpana introduced their EtherSwitch, the first Ethernet switch. An Ethernet switch does bridging in hardware, allowing it to forward packets at full wire speed. It is important to remember that the term switch was invented by device manufacturers and does not appear in the 802.3 standard. Functionally, the two terms are interchangeable.

Since packets are typically only delivered to the port they are intended for, traffic on a switched Ethernet is slightly less public than on shared-medium Ethernet. Despite this, switched Ethernet should still be regarded as an insecure network technology, because it is easy to subvert switched Ethernet systems by means such as ARP spoofing and MAC flooding. The bandwidth advantages, the slightly better isolation of devices from each other, the ability to easily mix different speeds of devices and the elimination of the chaining limits inherent in non-switched Ethernet have made switched Ethernet the dominant network technology.

When a twisted pair or fiber link segment is used and neither end is connected to a hub, full-duplex Ethernet becomes possible over that segment. In full duplex mode both devices can transmit and receive to/from each other at the same time, and there is no collision domain. This doubles the aggregate bandwidth of the link and is sometimes advertised as double the link speed (e.g. 200 Mbit/s) to account for this. However, this is misleading as performance will only double if traffic patterns are symmetrical (which in reality they rarely are). The elimination of the collision domain also means that all the link's bandwidth can be used and that segment length is not limited by the need for correct collision detection (this is most significant with some of the fiber variants of Ethernet).

Dual speed hubs

In the early days of Fast Ethernet, Ethernet switches were relatively expensive devices. However, hubs suffered from the problem that if there were any 10BASE-T devices connected then the whole system would have to run at 10 Mbit. Therefore a compromise between a hub and a switch appeared known as a dual speed hub. These devices consisted of an internal two-port switch, dividing the 10BASE-T (10 Mbit) and 100BASE-T (100 Mbit) segments. The device would typically consist of more than two physical ports. When a network device becomes active on any of the physical ports, the device attaches it to either the 10BASE-T segment or the 100BASE-T segment, as appropriate. This prevented the need for an all-or-nothing migration from 10BASE-T to 100BASE-T networks. These devices are also known as dual-speed hubs because the traffic between devices connected at the same speed is not switched.

More advanced networks

Simple switched Ethernet networks, while an improvement over hub based Ethernet, suffer from a number of issues:

• They suffer from single points of failure. If any link fails some devices will be unable to communicate with other devices and if the link that fails is in a central location lots of users can be cut off from the resources they require.
• It is possible to trick switches or hosts into sending data to your machine even if it's not intended for it (see switch vulnerabilities).
• Large amounts of broadcast traffic, whether malicious, accidental, or simply a side effect of network size can flood slower links and/or systems.
  • It is possible for any host to flood the network with broadcast traffic forming a denial of service attack against any hosts that run at the same or lower speed as the attacking device.
  • As the network grows, normal broadcast traffic takes up an ever greater amount of bandwidth.
  • If switches are not multicast aware, multicast traffic will end up treated like broadcast traffic due to being directed at a MAC with no associated port.
  • If switches discover more MAC addresses than they can store (either through network size or through an attack) some addresses must inevitably be dropped and traffic to those addresses will be treated the same way as traffic to unknown addresses, that is essentially the same as broadcast traffic (this issue is known as failopen).
• They suffer from bandwidth choke points where a lot of traffic is forced down a single link.

Some switches offer a variety of tools to combat these issues including:

• Spanning-tree protocol to maintain the active links of the network as a tree while allowing physical loops for redundancy.
• Various port protection features, as it is far more likely an attacker will be on an end system port than on a switch-switch link.
• VLANs to keep different classes of users separate while using the same physical infrastructure.
• Fast routing at higher levels to route between those VLANs.
• Link aggregation to add bandwidth to overloaded links and to provide some measure of redundancy, although the links won't protect against switch failure because they connect the same pair of switches.