From: Larson, Chris (CLarson@usaid.gov)
Date: Thu Aug 07 2003 - 13:22:38 GMT-3
With the DLSW icanreach, since it tells the peer it has connectivity to the
mac, there is no need for the peer to send out explorer traffic for that
node.
The command you chose only establishes connectivity to the destination when
an explorer is sent for that mac address. Any other explorers that might be
sent for other mac-addresses would not use that particular configured peer
(in the case of multiple remote peers it is a way of telling which peer to
use depending on destination mac I guess)
This is my understanding.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ccie2be [SMTP:ccie2be@nyc.rr.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2003 11:46 AM
> To: Group Study
> Subject: dlsw - mac reachability
>
> good morning everyone,
>
> I had practice lab requirement as follows:
>
> Assume that only mac 4000.4000.4000 and 4000.4000.4001 exist on the T/R
> between R1 and R5. Configure R1 and/or R5 such that explorer traffic is
> limited to only the mac address:
>
>
> I thought I could fulfill this requirement with the following command on
> R1
>
> dlsw remote-peer 0 tcp 192.168.3.3 dest-mac 4000.4000.4000
>
> and a similar command on R5.
>
> But, the solution used:
>
> Dlsw icanreach mac-exclusive
> Dlsw icanreach mac-address 4000.4000.4000 mask ffff.ffff.fffe
>
> I don't have T/R in my lab so I can't test this but I'm wondering what's
> the
> difference between these 2 techniques?
>
> Any advice or insight is greatly appreciated. Thanks, dt
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> 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 : Tue Sep 02 2003 - 18:53:55 GMT-3