From: Yves Fauser (Yves@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Sun Aug 19 2001 - 04:56:13 GMT-3
Hey Daniel,
sorry but my mask is right, remember it is read like a subnet mask, not like a
wildcard mask !
Paduh,
There is no mask in the <dlsw mac-address> command
Yves
"Daniel C. Young" wrote:
> This is one option, but 'dlsw mac-address' statement allows you only to
> define a single reachable mac address. If you want to specify a range of mac
> addresses, then the other option is a better one. Yves was on the right
> track, but his mask was off.
>
> Regards,
> Daniel
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
> CCIE yong
> Sent: Saturday, 18 August 2001 11:11 PM
> To: danyoung99@mediaone.net
> Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: Explore Frame and DLSW+
>
> Hi, I don't understand your hunt.
>
> what I'd do in the following question is I'll do a :
>
> dlsw mac-address xxxxxxxxxxxx ip remote peer's ip to accomplish that, will
> this statement put the mac-address in the local cache ?
>
> or there is other way to do it ?
>
> Thanks
> Yonber
>
> >From: "Daniel C. Young" <danyoung99@mediaone.net>
> >Reply-To: "Daniel C. Young" <danyoung99@mediaone.net>
> >To: "'Padhu \(LFG\)'" <padhu@steinroe.com>, "'Yves Fauser '"
> ><Yves@Fauser.de>, "'Georges Lauture '" <glauture@hotmail.com>
> >CC: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> >Subject: RE: Explore Frame and DLSW+
> >Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 20:40:14 -0700
> >
> >Hey Padhu.
> >
> >George, here is a hint: if you don't want your local hosts to have to send
> >explorers to reach the remote host, then your local peer must have that
> >mac-address in its local cache. What if the remote peer were to advertise
> >this mac-address as part of its capabilities exchange?
> >
> >Daniel
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
> >Padhu (LFG)
> >Sent: Saturday, 18 August 2001 3:50 PM
> >To: 'Yves Fauser '; 'Georges Lauture '
> >Cc: 'ccielab@groupstudy.com '
> >Subject: RE: Explore Frame and DLSW+
> >
> >
> > Can you also not do a static mapping ?
> >dlsw mac-address xxxxxxxxxxxx ip remote peer's ip. I never tried using a
> >wild card mask though with this command.
> >
> >No failover if remote peer fails though.
> >
> >Cheers,Padhu
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Yves Fauser
> >To: Georges Lauture
> >Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> >Sent: 8/18/01 10:25 AM
> >Subject: Re: Explore Frame and DLSW+
> >
> >George,
> >
> >Your question is kind of confusing regarding the wording. If you say "it
> >does
> >not need to send an explorer Frame", the only thing that I would suggest
> >is
> >to put a static rif entry into your router. This would enable a users
> >station
> >on the ring to reach a host on a remote ring using an local explorer.
> >But
> >there is no mask in this command.
> >If the question was "it does not need to send a canureach explorer (via
> >dlsw)", than the answer is to type int <dlsw icanreach mac-address
> >4000.2200.0000 mask ffff.ffff.0000> on the remote peer, so that your
> >peer
> >knows that it can reach the address 4000.2200.xxxx via the remote peer
> >after
> >cap_exchange. But if the users station want's to reach any other station
> >or
> >host outside of the local ring, it has to send out an single or all
> >routes
> >explorer frame.
> >
> >Yves
> >
> >
> >
> >Georges Lauture wrote:
> >
> > > How to configure so that a user connected to a Ring needs to
> >communicate
> > > with a MAC address starting with 4000.2200.xxxx, It does not need to
> >send
> > > an explorer frame?
> >**Please read:http://www.groupstudy.com/list/posting.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:31:53 GMT-3