From: Mike S. Lee (mikele@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Thu Jan 04 2001 - 11:39:51 GMT-3
if you use dlsw icanreach mac-exclusive without defining a mac mac address
in an icanreach then all traffic will be filtered.
www.cisco.com/warp/public/697/dlswfilter.shtml
mike
At 05:10 PM 1/4/2001 +0800, YJC wrote:
>hu,
>
>I know if I use command"dlsw icanreach mac-exclusive on router 2, then R1
>only can access mac addrss 4444.4444.4444, but what happen if i use command
>dlsw icanreach mac-exclusive remote on router 2?
>
>regards
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Wayne Hu <wayneccie@yahoo.com>
>To: Padhu (LFG) <padhu@steinroe.com>; 'Wayne Hu' <wayneccie@yahoo.com>; John
>Doe <lab_help@yahoo.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 1:52 AM
>Subject: RE: DLSW mac-exclusive remote / Does the mac need to be bit swapped
>if remote is a TR ?
>
>
> > answer your question 1:
> > on router 2, if you put the command dlsw icanreach mac-exclusive, then R1
> > only can access mac addrss 4444.4444.4444, otherwise R1 can access all
> > mac-address.
> >
> > answer your question 2:
> > only ethernet address need to be bit swapped, you don't need do bit
>swaping
> > for TR station.
> > Station1-------Ethernet----------R1----------------R2------Token
> > ring---------Station2
> > if i canreach mac-address put on R2 to let Station1 access station2, you
> > don't need bit swapping.
> > if i canreach mac-address put on R1 to let Station2 access station1, you
>do
> > need bit swapping.
> >
> >
> > CMIIW
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
> > Padhu (LFG)
> > Sent: January 3, 2001 11:54 AM
> > To: 'Wayne Hu'; John Doe; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: DLSW mac-exclusive remote / Does the mac need to be bit swapped
> > if remote is a TR ?
> >
> >
> > If i understand it right, if u do NOT want the explorers to be sent,
> > (explorers are sent when the reachability info is not available in
> > cache),then
> > u can do dlsw i canreach mac-address 4444.4444.4444 on the 10.1.1.2
> > router-2.
> > this would be pushed to the downstream dlsw peer .
> >
> > question related to the same topic :
> >
> > 1. If i use dlsw i canreach mac-exclusive 4444.4444.4444 on the 10.1.1.2,
> > then R1 can reach ONLY 4444.4444.4444 . Right ? I don't understand how the
> > keyword
> > remote fixes this by allowing other macs too..Can someone explains pls ?
> > dlsw i canreach mac-exclusive 4444.4444.4444 remote
> >
> > 2. if the remote end station that needs to be reached is TR station
>,should
> > the
> > dlsw i canreach mac-address be bit swapped for the ethernet peer
> > downstream
> > to recognise?
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Wayne Hu [mailto:wayneccie@yahoo.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 10:53 AM
> > To: John Doe; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: RE: dlsw filtering
> >
> >
> > Will this work?
> > on Router one
> > dlsw local-peer peer-id 10.1.1.1
> > dlsw remote-peer 0 tcp 10.1.1.2 dmac-output-list 701
> > access-list 701 deny 4444.4444.4444 0000.0000.0000
> > access-list 701 permit 0000.0000.0000 ffff.ffff.ffff
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
> > John Doe
> > Sent: January 3, 2001 10:55 AM
> > To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: dlsw filtering
> >
> >
> > How can I stop Router ONE from sending explorer
> > packets to Router TWO looking for MAC address
> > 4444.4444.4444?
> >
> > Please email me directly.
> >
> > John
> >
> >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:27:22 GMT-3