From: Joe Chang (changjoe@earthlink.net)
Date: Fri Dec 06 2002 - 19:34:18 GMT-3
Whoa, there's an incredible degree of different ideas about these two issues
going on in our mailing list. There have been previous posts stating the
exact opposite of what either of you two gentlemen have written!
----- Original Message -----
From: <Sam.MicroGate@usa.telekom.de>
To: <ybae@cisco.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 6:04 PM
Subject: RE: ICANREACH Mac-Exclusive
> Hello,
>
> 1- The mac-exclusive has nothing to do with the deny statement at the end.
> It is just telling the remote peer do not send me any explorer packet for
> any other mac address. All I know is mac address 4000.3745.0000. Nothing
> else.
>
> 2- True you have to change the mac add from its canonical to non-canonical
> format.
>
> Sam
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Young K. Bae [mailto:ybae@cisco.com]
> Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 4:29 PM
> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: ICANREACH Mac-Exclusive
>
>
> A quick sanity check on the ICANREACH statement:
>
> dlsw icanreach mac-exclusive
> dlsw icanreach mac-address 4000.3745.0000 mask ffff.ffff.ffff
>
> 1. According to the documentation, there is an 'implicit deny-all' within
> the ICANREACH <mac-address> statement. If that's true, why would one need
> to configure 'dlsw icanreach mac-exclusive'?
>
> 2. Considering above configuration, if the device (MAC 4000.3745.0000)
> resides on an Ethernet segment, the true MAC address of the device is
> 0200.ECA2.0000, correct?
>
> TIA,
> .
.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jan 17 2003 - 17:21:40 GMT-3