From: Jonathan V Hays (jhays@jtan.com)
Date: Tue Jul 15 2003 - 08:42:14 GMT-3
Well, you are right that we are all just talking theory. And admittedly
the Doc CD is full of errors so we can't believe that source either.
We need to configure a real-world workstation-to-workstation scenario
and post some actual results. Otherwise it's all talk.
Anyone got a pair of NetBEUI workstations, one with TR and one with
ethernet?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Snow, Tim [mailto:timothy.snow@eds.com]
> Sent: Monday, July 14, 2003 11:49 PM
> To: 'Jonathan V Hays'
> Cc: 'ccielab@groupstudy.com'
> Subject: RE: Ethernet-to-Ethernet DLSW ICANREACH
>
>
> I just labbed up the same scenario as you (basically)
>
> r8---r9
>
> r8 is advertising 0200.4556.1140 via the "dlsw icanreach mac-add
> 0200.4556.1140"
>
> r9#sh dlsw reac
> DLSw Local MAC address reachability cache list
> Mac Addr status Loc. port rif
>
> DLSw Remote MAC address reachability cache list
> Mac Addr status Loc. peer
> 0200.4556.1140 UNCONFIRM REMOTE 98.98.98.8(2065)
>
> The previos was seen on r9. If a host wants to communicate
> with the mac
> 0200.4556.1140, won't the local dlsw router know to use the
> DLSW peer at
> 98.98.98.8 to get to this MAC. Why does it need to be bit swapped? I
> thought when you advertise reachability, the only time you
> need to do the
> bitswap is when your going between TR and Ethernet. In
> either case, if the
> remote peer learns the MAC, why would it have to bitswap
> either way if it
> knows it wants to communicate with 0200.4556.1140?
>
> Tim
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonathan V Hays [mailto:jhays@jtan.com]
> Sent: Monday, July 14, 2003 9:33 PM
> To: 'Biondino, Joseph'
> Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: Ethernet-to-Ethernet DLSW ICANREACH
>
>
> http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/697/dlswts8.html
>
> "Remember that entries in show dlsw reach appear in
> non-canonical format
> ..."
>
> So let's try an experiment:
> -----
> r1#sh run | include dlsw icanreach
> dlsw icanreach mac-address 00e0.b05a.e74d mask ffff.ffff.ffff
> r1#
>
> r2#sh dlsw reachability
> DLSw Local MAC address reachability cache list
> Mac Addr status Loc. port rif
>
> DLSw Remote MAC address reachability cache list
> Mac Addr status Loc. peer
> 00e0.b05a.e74d UNCONFIRM REMOTE 10.1.1.1(2065)
>
> DLSw Local NetBIOS Name reachability cache list
> NetBIOS Name status Loc. port rif
>
> DLSw Remote NetBIOS Name reachability cache list
> NetBIOS Name status Loc. peer
>
> r2#
> -----
>
> Note that the "sh dlsw reachability" output is displaying
> what it thinks
> is a non-canonical address. This mac address is exactly the
> same as the
> one I configured on r1. IOS did *not* do any conversion. From this we
> have to conclude the engineer must do the conversion, if necessary.
>
> If the mac address is from a token ring interface, no conversion is
> necessary.
>
> If the mac address is from an ethernet interface (canonical) then you
> must convert it to non-canonical format prior to using it in a DLSW
> filter.
>
> HTH,
>
> Jonathan
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On
> > Behalf Of Biondino, Joseph
> > Sent: Monday, July 14, 2003 7:50 PM
> > To: Richard L. Pickard
> > Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: RE: Ethernet-to-Ethernet DLSW ICANREACH
> >
> >
> > I have had some conflicting answers regarding this question,
> > does anybody
> > know the answer for sure??
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Joseph Biondino
> > Network Specialist
> > UNISYS
> > Network Command Centre
> >
> > 115 - 117 Wicks Rd
> > North Ryde NSW 2113
> > Phone: 02 9857 3149
> > Group: 02 9390 1107
> > Fax: 02 9857 3122
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Richard L. Pickard [mailto:nettable_walker@comcast.net]
> > Sent: Monday, 14 July 2003 2:12 PM
> > To: Biondino, Joseph
> > Subject: RE: Ethernet-to-Ethernet DLSW ICANREACH
> >
> > If it's ethernet to ethernet cisco's own example does not
> > show the bit
> > swap.
> >
> > Richard
> >
> > //
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nobody@groupstudy.com
> [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
> > Biondino, Joseph
> > Sent: Sunday, July 13, 2003 6:19 PM
> > To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: Ethernet-to-Ethernet DLSW ICANREACH
> >
> >
> > Hi;
> >
> > I was asked to configure an Ethernet LAN to Ethernet LAN SNA
> > connection with
> > DLSW running over a Frame Relay WAN yesterday. One of the
> > requirements was
> > to get one router to announce in the capabilities exchange
> > that it can reach
> > a specified MAC address. (1111.2222.3333)
> >
> > I configured the following:
> >
> > Dlsw icanreach 1111.2222.3333
> >
> > I then had a thought that I needed to bit swap as the host
> > was Ethernet
> > connected. Can somebody please advise on whether the bit swap
> > is required in
> > the dlsw icanreach command for Ethernet connected devices??
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Joseph Biondino
> > Network Specialist
> > UNISYS
> > Network Command Centre
> >
> > 115 - 117 Wicks Rd
> > North Ryde NSW 2113
> > Phone: 02 9857 3149
> > Group: 02 9390 1107
> > Fax: 02 9857 3122
> >
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > _________
> > 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
> >
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > _________
> > 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
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> _________
> 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 : Wed Aug 06 2003 - 06:52:39 GMT-3