this is not a feature.
this is a bug, a quite common one that i've noticed.
of course, cisco is just going to tell you that thier layer two switches are
sooo smart that they are actually doing ,ayer three switching, but check
your source and destination MAC addresses =)
That was supposed to b
this is not a feature.
this is a bug, a quite common one that i've noticed.
of course, cisco is just going to tell you that thier layer two switches are
sooo smart that they are actually doing ,ayer three switching, but check
your source and destination MAC addresses =)
That was supposed to b
issue allowed me to convince the layers above that we needed a
"tap" to ensure sniffers were not missing traffic
Bob
> -Original Message-
> From: John Neiberger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 1:40 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Leaky
You may be on to something but I'd have to research it. The switch and
NMS are on the same subnet and, now that I think about it, the NMS is
connected to the same switch that I'm on.
Hmm.that makes this even stranger! Since this is unicast traffic
destined for the switch itself, I wonder
You would also see flooded unicast traffic until the switch learns the
correct port to use for a destination MAC address. That might not explain
the SNMP traffic though. That just sounds like a leak!?
Priscilla
At 04:40 PM 7/17/01, John Neiberger wrote:
>I'm running a demo of some LAN analysis
I'm running a demo of some LAN analysis software from my PC which is
connected to a non-SPAN port. So, I should only see unicast traffic
to/from my workstation, broadcasts, and multicasts, right? right!
However, from time to time I see unicast packets that are neither
destined for or originated
6 matches
Mail list logo
