home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.edu!agate!ucbvax!LUDWIG.CTD.ORNL.GOV!LPZ
- From: LPZ@LUDWIG.CTD.ORNL.GOV ("Lawrence MacIntyre - 615.576.0824")
- Newsgroups: comp.os.vms
- Subject: Re: Ethernet address (sans code) ?
- Message-ID: <930122141251.2020011d@LUDWIG.CTD.ORNL.GOV>
- Date: 22 Jan 93 19:12:51 GMT
- Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
- Distribution: world
- Organization: The Internet
- Lines: 31
-
- >>>BTW, why is the physical address reset to match the DECnet address ?
- >...
- >> Now, of course, you see why it is good that other
- >> protocols don't do this, because you would be unable to run DECnet and the
- >> other protocol over the same piece of hardware if they did.
- >>
- >Not so. Many controllers inplement the 'physical address' the same as a
- >multi-cast address. Not that Dec bought the Decnet address block to avoid
- >collisions. Trouble is, it stops you having 2 or more decnets on one LAN.
-
- Paul:
-
- This is intriguing! I haven't had experience with controllers like this. How
- does the controller know which address to give as the source address for which
- packet. Multicast addresses are used as destination, not source addresses.
-
- Also, having several DECnets on one LAN would be a little more involved than
- not using the physical equivalent of the DECnet address, if you wanted to
- REALLY separate them. Am I missing something?
-
- Lawrence
- ~
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
- Internet: MACINTYRELP@ORNL.GOV US-Snail: Lawrence MacIntyre
- LPZ@ORNL.GOV AT&T: 615.576.0824
-
- p.s. I would have sent a personal reply in this case, because I'm not really
- sure what you are saying, but I can't figure out your address or your
- name (other than just paul) from your post.
-
-