From: Chris Home (clarson52@comcast.net)
Date: Wed Dec 11 2002 - 21:26:11 GMT-3
oops. Sorry, I see about the access-list mask. So what is the result? Which
had the bug?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ram Shummoogum" <rshummoo@ca.ibm.com>
To: <clarson52@comcast.net>
Cc: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 7:02 PM
Subject: Re: DLSW bitswap-confusion
> If you look at the mask you will notice that I don't care about the last
24
> bits.
> I did some more digging on the CCO and found that there is a bug in dlsw
> access-list and has been fixed in 12.1xxxxx. There are a lot of versions
> affected including 12.0(21). They don't give too much detail about the
bug.
>
>
> cheers,
> RAM
>
> Chris Home <clarson52@comcast.net> on 12/11/2002 06:41:45 PM
>
> To: Ram Shummoogum/Quebec/IBM@IBMCA, ccielab@groupstudy.com
> cc:
> Subject: Re: DLSW bitswap-confusion
>
>
> The rule that goes around says always non-canonical with dlsw. I am not
> sure, but I would say no, you wouldn't bit swap the already non-canonical
> token ring mac. I have my doubts of course because of it working both
ways.
> Also, I don't think the bit-swapping operation you did is correct. Maybe
> you
> just didn't want to finish it out ? I get 0200.080A.0880.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ram Shummoogum" <rshummoo@ca.ibm.com>
> To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 5:41 PM
> Subject: DLSW bitswap-confusion
>
>
> > Hi Experts:
> >
> >
> > E0-----RA--(dlsw)---RB----TR0
> >
> > My host is at TR0 with mac 400010501001
> > My PU is at E0 ( I have bit-swapped 400010501001 to 0200.0800.0000)
> >
> > I have an output filter on E0 that will permit the host.
> >
> > I am running 120.0.21 and my filter is like that:
> >
> > access-list 1101 permit 0200.0800.0000 0000.00ff.ffff 0000.0000.0000
> > ffff.ffff.ffff
> >
> > with the above config everything works fine as shown in the show dlsw
> peers
> > or circuits etc....
> >
> >
> >
> > My problem is that When I use version 12.1.17 I have to change my ACL to
> > the followign to get the same results.
> >
> > access-list 1101 permit 4000.1000.0000 0000.00ff.ffff 0000.0000.0000 ff
> > ff.ffff.ffff
> >
> >
> > One of them must have a bug and the Big ? is which one.
> >
> > should I bitswapped or not??
> >
> >
> > regards,
> > RAM-514-205-6612
> > .
.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jan 17 2003 - 17:21:44 GMT-3