From: Nguyen Hoang Long (ng-hlong@hn.vnn.vn)
Date: Wed Jun 18 2003 - 23:04:14 GMT-3
Hossam,
+ DLSW uses non-canonical, so I would always do the conversion ( canonical
to non-canonical) for any Ethernet MAC address for all command that it
involves.
+ "explorer-delay-time" is correct.
I never tried any of DLSW stuff in my Lab, but I can tell you those based on
all document I have read.
Thanks,
Long
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hossam Mahmoud" <sam6626@yahoo.com>
To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 2:44 AM
Subject: DLSW Again and Again! (Canonicals and Timers)
> Group,
> I know that this issue was raised before. But it had never been really
killed.
>
> I wish we do this time. I have two questions:
>
> First when to use canonical format and where to use nons:
> * So far i am ALMOST sure (from documentation) that on any access list
regardless where it is applied we have to use canonical (ethernet) cause
that is how routers interpret it.
>
> * Moreover, i am ALMOST sure that (from documentation) that routers only
use non-canonicals in any DLSW traffic. So if traffic passes over any media
that supports canonocal the routers handle transformation.
>
> But the pending issues are :
> 1) In case of DLSW commands like:
> dlsw icanreach mac-address HHHH.HHHH.HHHH
> which format shall we use?
>
> and taking ia step further,
>
> 2- In case of dlsw commands that refers to mac-address lists like,
> dlsw remote tcp ............ dmac-output-list
> which format shall we use??
>
> Secondly:
> If i need a peer router to delay accepting or relpying to explorers, which
timer shall i use??
>
> Here is the defentions of timers as in commands referance. I am not so
sure if they are true cause some friends insists that they are not correct.
>
> explorer-wait-time =
>
> Time to wait for all stations to respond to explorers. The valid range is
1 to 86400 seconds. The default is 0.
>
> explorer-delay-time =
> Time to wait before sending or accepting explorers. The valid range is 1
to 5 minutes. The default is 0.
>
> My interpratation for the above is to use the delay (not wait) option.
> Did any one try these timers in real life or labs?? I wish sooo...
>
> Thanks a lot for yr time reading this lenghty mail...
> SAM
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> You are subscribed to the GroupStudy.com CCIE R&S Discussion Group.
>
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jul 04 2003 - 11:11:00 GMT-3