From: Bernard Dunn (dunn@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Thu Jan 11 2001 - 04:32:02 GMT-3
Tony,
Just be careful about the canonical/non-canonical term:
non-canonical = token ring
canonical = ethernet
the bitswapping tool has a pretty good graphic explaination on how to
manually convert addresses:
http://www.cisco.com/cgi-bin/Support/Bitswap/bitswap.pl
Regards
Bernard.
On Wed, 10 Jan 2001, Anthony Maurello wrote:
> Michelle:
>
> I think I understand your question. After configuring dlsw+ on both routers
> and building your basic peerings, you can see both the canonical and
> non-canonical addresses depending on which bridge you view. If you do a
> "show bridge", you will see the standard non-canonical ethernet address. If
> you do a show dlsw reach (that will show the local reachability macs), they
> will be in canonical format. The tricky part if determining which
> non-canonical address relates to which canonical address. I wouldn't trust
> this trick, since you will not have an actual ethernet node on the dlsw peer
> in the lab exam.
>
> Also, I ran your conversion just for kicks and I think you are off by a
> byte. I get 00-20-30-d0-08-00, you have the same string except 00-00 at the
> beginning. I'm not sure what happened here.
>
> - Tony
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
> Michelle T
> Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2001 5:02 PM
> To: Earl Aboytes; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: More Canonical to Non-canonical in DLSW
>
>
> RE: More Canonical to Non-canonical in DLSWAha! I just realized, I didn't
> say exactly what I meant. If I hard code an icanreach into the peer
> statement, then I have to convert it to non-can. yes? And wasn't there a way
> to do a show dlsw command to get this conversion without having to perform
> it?
>
> I should have made that clear. Not a dynamic icanreach, but a statically
> defined icanreach on the peer statement. And then I presume R2 gets it and
> tranlates it back for the ethernet group and leaves it as is for the token
> ring users.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Earl Aboytes
> To: 'Michelle T' ; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2001 3:47 PM
> Subject: RE: More Canonical to Non-canonical in DLSW
>
>
> In this case you would see R1 advertise non-canonical to R2 and R2 would NOT
> have to convert it.
> Earl Aboytes, CCIE 6097
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michelle T [mailto:mtruman@mn.mediaone.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2001 10:35 AM
> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: More Canonical to Non-canonical in DLSW
> ----Bridge 1
> E0
> Bridge 1 E0--- R1 ------------------ R2 ----Ring 1 T0
>
>
> Ok, More on canonical vs. non-canonical with the icanreach statement
> R1 has a peer statement to R2 and wishes to advertise a device that resides
> on R1-E0. Mac address is 0004.0c0b.1000
> R2 has both token ring and ethernet sna users.
> Does the R1 icanreach advertise the native 0004.0c0b.1000? (ethernet,
> canonical)? I think that it does not.
> So R1 advertises icanreach 2030.d008.0000 (feel free to check my
> conversion).
> Then does DLSW convert it back on R2 for the ethernet bridge group but not
> convert it for the Token ring users?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:27:27 GMT-3