RE: DLSW Icanreach [7:70154]

2003-06-05 Thread Peter Paul
You should do bit-swapping because the routers will speak in non-canonical
addressing.


Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=70164t=70154
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


RE: DLSW Icanreach [7:70154]

2003-06-04 Thread Priscilla Oppenheimer
Token Ring uses non-canonical addresses. There shouldn't be a need to swap
addresses if both hosts are on Ethernet.

Priscilla

Azhar Teza wrote:
 
 There is a lot of confusion about running dlsw+ between two
 routers. For example, If a there is a peer relationship between
 r1 and r2. r1 config, dlsw local-peer peer-id 1.1.1.1 dlsw
 remote-peer 0 tcp 2.2.2.2 r2 config, dlsw local-peer peer-id
 2.2.2.2 dlsw remot-peer 0 tcp 1.1.1.1 both r1 and r2 have
 ethernet host. host on r1's mac-address is 1234.4321.0001 Now I
 want r2 to reach an ethernet host only. my statement would be
 on r1 dlsw icannreach mac-address 1234.4321.0001 mask
 .. dlsw icanreach mac-exclusive. Is the above
 statement correct? or will I have to do a bit-swapping since
 the ehternet only understands cononial format, and dlsw
 understands non-cononial format, then it should be like that
 dlsw icanreach mac-address 483c.c383.0080 mask ..
 dlsw icanreach mac-exculsive. Please confirm when to do
 bitswapping in pure ethernet enviroment. Thanks, Teza
 
 ___
 Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
 The most personalized portal on the Web!
 
 




Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=70165t=70154
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]