From: Scott Morris (swm@emanon.com)
Date: Wed Mar 05 2003 - 11:52:53 GMT-3
That command (and article) has to do with ethernet networks and token
ring networks natively bridged together (i.e. without DLSW in the middle
anywhere). I don't believe it's necessary at all in DLSW networks.
The command will "fix" things on ARP replies which is where you would
find a mismatch of canonical and non-canonical addresses hindering
reachability. In DLSW, you don't flood ARPs through the network, you
exchange ICANREACH or CANUREACH requests between the peers who would
already have handled swapping the bit order for you.
Scott
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
David Heaton
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 2:36 AM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: bit ordering of MAC address
there is the "bridge x bitswap-layer3-addresses"
command
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/tech/tk331/tk660/technologies_tech_no
te09186a008012811e.shtml
>>> <Sam.MicroGate@usa.telekom.de> 24/02/03 11:40:54 pm >>>
No it is all automatic. You only need the conversion when you configure
filters.
Sam
-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Young [mailto:gitsyoung@yahoo.co.jp]
Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 4:12 AM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: bit ordering of MAC address
In the following network ,should I use some command to translate the
canonical to non-canonical ? Resume I the dls's peer setting is ok.
To0--Router--Eth0
or To0--Router--WAN--Router--Eth0
Thanks alot
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 05 2003 - 08:51:32 GMT-3