home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!ames!olivea!inews.Intel.COM!buster!skishen
- From: skishen@buster.intel.com (Sunil Kishen)
- Newsgroups: comp.dcom.sys.cisco
- Subject: Does the Cisco cache Vines address???
- Keywords: Banyan Vines.
- Message-ID: <C03o7w.G4v@inews.Intel.COM>
- Date: 31 Dec 92 01:31:07 GMT
- Sender: news@inews.Intel.COM (USENET News System)
- Reply-To: skishen@buster.intel.com (Sunil Kishen)
- Organization: Intel Corporation, Santa Clara, CA USA
- Lines: 34
- Nntp-Posting-Host: buster
-
- How does the Cisco configure itself a vines address upon starting vines
- routing??
- It is my understanding that it uses 3000 appended to the last 4 octets
- of its E0 interface
- MAC address. Eg: if the E0 MAC addr. is 0000.0c00.ff00, then the
- cisco's vines addr. would
- be 3000ff00.1 ( so far so good).
-
- Now if we replace the MEC6 with a new MEC6 then the E0 MAC address would
- change. The
- Cisco should ideally change its Vines address to 3000xxxx.1 (where xxxx
- is the last 4 octets
- of the new MAC address of E0).
-
- Under 9.0(2) GS3BFx this is not the case! The vines address did not
- change. Upon disabling
- vines routing and restarting it again it still remained the same (as the
- old vines addr.).
-
- This bug led to a situation where two Ciscos had the same vines addr.
- (use old mec6 in a
- new router and start vines routing)!!.
-
- It took me a while to figure this situation out....
-
- Could someone at Cisco comment on this ... Thanks....
- Pl. Email replies. Thanks...
- Sunil.
-
- ---
- Sunil Kishen
- ICES Networking.
- Intel Corp.
- Santa Clara, CA 95052.
-