From: Jason Cash (cash2001@swbell.net)
Date: Tue Jan 07 2003 - 23:14:53 GMT-3
Doesn't (canonical) 0001.1111.1111 = (non-canonical) 0008.8888.8888?
Also when working with MAC addresses ACL (700-799) I read that filters
MUST be in non-canonical format. IS this correct?
What about when you are working with the 'dlsw icanreach/icannotreach'
commands? What should be used in that instance?
-----Original Message-----
From: Ram Shummoogum [mailto:rshummoo@ca.ibm.com]
Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 9:08 PM
To: cash2001@swbell.net
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: MAC Address and subnet masks...
bit swapping 0001.1111.1111 gives 0080.8888.8888
it is probably a typo.
"Jason Cash" <cash2001@swbell.net>@groupstudy.com on 01/06/2003 09:34:38
PM
Please respond to "Jason Cash" <cash2001@swbell.net>
Sent by: nobody@groupstudy.com
To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
cc:
Subject: MAC Address and subnet masks...
I am having trouble understanding MAC address filters. Working on a
Boson lab (6.4) and it instructs one to:
Configure a static definition pointing to R as the DSLSW peer to reach
an Eth. Attached device with MAC 0001.1111.1111
The answer is such:
Dlsw icanreach mac-address 0080.5555.5555 mask ffff.ffff.ffff
How did they get this mac address? Also is there a link available that
will demystify the MAC address ACLs and subnet masks?
.
.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Feb 01 2003 - 07:33:45 GMT-3