From: fningham@xxxxxxx
Date: Wed Apr 24 2002 - 16:12:25 GMT-3
For the example given, I would treat it as non-canonical
and not convert it. The reason is that the address given
is a broadcast address if it were canonical.
Any scenario should be somewhat clear as to the address
origin. The problem arises with scenario writers who put
a MAC such as 4000.3745.0001 and don't realize that this
is a locally asigned MAC address in non-canonical format,
or 1111.2222.3333 and don't realize this is a broadcast
address in canonical format.
HTH, Fred.
> Dennis,
>
> Let be more precise, if I am asked to filter (deny or permit) this address
> mac 1111.2222.3333 in a dlsw question, should I type the mac address
> 8888.4444.cccc in my access-list command?
>
> Sam
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dennis.D.Adekola@britishairways.com
> [mailto:Dennis.D.Adekola@britishairways.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 10:43 AM
> To: Sam.MicroGate@usa.telekom.de
> Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: MAC address format
>
>
>
> All address formats in DLSW are in Non Canonical format (token ring style)
>
>
> Dennis
>
>
>
>
> Sam.MicroGate@usa.telekom.de@groupstudy.com on 24/04/2002 15:12:01
>
> Please respond to Sam.MicroGate@usa.telekom.de
>
> Sent by: nobody@groupstudy.com
>
>
> To: ccielab
> cc:
> bcc:
> Subject: MAC address format
>
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> I need to know which MAC address format to use when I configure dlsw
> filters. Is it can or non-can?
>
> Elsayed Mohamed
> Sr. Network Consultant
> Microgateds, Inc.
> 732-936-4413
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:58:18 GMT-3