From: Collins Bill (parfour_on_9@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Thu Mar 23 2000 - 18:41:34 GMT-3
The answer is no. This is the reason to use this numbering scheme so that
if DECNET is enabled, a 1.1.1 will bit-swap to exactly the same number.
Tricky, no?
Bob
>From: "Maljure, Sanjay" <smaljure@cibernetworks.com>
>Reply-To: "Maljure, Sanjay" <smaljure@cibernetworks.com>
>CC: CCIE Lab <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>Subject: IPX addresses and Decnet addresses
>Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 16:28:16 -0500
>
>Hi All,
>I noticed a nice thread a few days ago about the various filters and lists
>w.r.t. DLSW+, ring-list, port-list, bgroup-list, icanreach, icannotreach
>etc.
>
>I was wondering if anybody would be willing to share their "checklists" for
>various kinds of access-lists especially the mac-address filters,
>netbios-filters, lsap-lists etc. Would be grateful
>
>Also can anybody confirm the following:
>
>If I say
>
>ipx routing 1.1.1 (manually specify the node address for the IPX router),
>will DECnet still mess it up?
>
>Thanks for ur time
>
>Sanjay Maljure
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:23:06 GMT-3