From: li jian hua (jasonli@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Tue Jun 25 2002 - 23:03:12 GMT-3
If the address is non-canonical format,you can use it directly.
If the address is canonical,you must do bit swapping.
Please go to http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/697/dlswfilter.shtml to see
an example.
Token ring MAC address is non-canonical format,and Ethernet MAC
address is canonical
format.
rgds
At 23:31 2002-6-25 +0000, Anthony Pace wrote:
>Is it fair to say that in DLSw+, the only time an address needs to be
>bit swapped is if an Ethernet resource is being advertised via
>"ICANREACH" to potentialy "token-ring possessing" clients. Can the
>reverse also be true?
>yes no
>I would assume that any resources advertised by the dynamic mechanisms
>of DLSw+ would somehow do all this automatically. Is that correct?
>yes
>Anthony Pace
>
>
>
>On Mon, 24 Jun 2002 11:16:42 +0800, "li jian hua" <jasonli@cisco.com>
>said:
> > HI David,
> > Thanks your email.
> >
> > Here I summarize :
> >
> > the address 3745.1000.1010 used in the book is already non-canonical
> > format,the author has converted
> > before using it.
> >
> > if that, the book is right
> >
> > If i am wrong,please help to correct.
> > rgds
> > jason
> > At 19:57 2002-6-23 -0700, David Luu wrote:
> > >you are correct in that dlsw should use non-canonical addresses...when
> you
> > >look at the "show dlsw reachability" output it shows the local mac
> address
> > >reachability, this is the address you want to use which is already
> > >translated in non-canonical format...so im assuming that in the book, the
> > >netbios mac-address is already in non-canonical format
> > >
> > >At 07:20 PM 6/23/2002 -0700, David Luu wrote:
> > >>sorry about that...i thought you were referring the mac address of the
> > >>router's e0
> > >>
> > >>At 10:02 AM 6/24/2002 +0800, li jian hua wrote:
> > >>>HI David,
> > >>>We all know dlsw command should use non-canonical address.
> > >>>The Ethernet address is canonical,so we must change it to non-canonical
> > >>>when using it by the dlsw command.
> > >>>You say the book is right,please give a reason for it,or else you will
> > >>>mislead a lot of people in the group.
> > >>>rgds
> > >>>jason
> > >>>
> > >>>At 14:30 2002-6-23 -0700, David Luu wrote:
> > >>>>the book is correct...the dlsw icanreach mac-address does what it
> says,
> > >>>>it can REACH the defined mac-address
> > >>>>
> > >>>>At 10:08 PM 6/23/2002 +0800, li jian hua wrote:
> > >>>>>HI ALL,
> > >>>>>At the page 934 of the book CCIE Practical studies,there is a
> > >>>>>configuration:
> > >>>>>dlsw icanreach mac-address 3745.1000.1010 mask ffff.ffff.ffff
> > >>>>>dlsw bridge-group 1
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>I think "mac-address 3745.1000.1010" should be written as
> > >>>>>"mac-address eca2.0800.0808"
> > >>>>>Because the mac-address 3745.1000.1010 is a pc under the e0 interface
> > >>>>>of the router.
> > >>>>>Here 3745.1000.1010 is an Ethernet MAC address.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>router(e0)------------pc(3745.1000.1010 0)
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>please help.
> > >>>>>rgds
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Jul 02 2002 - 08:12:41 GMT-3