nanog mailing list archives
Re: Bit-dumping [Was: Re: Peering Policy]
From: Paul Ferguson <pferguso () cisco com>
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 17:08:45 -0500
I think this sounds like a fine idea. - paul At 02:25 PM 10/30/96 -0500, Jon Zeeff wrote:
Which is why someone at NANOG suggested using the port # (vs. MAC address).Problem is that if hardware fails or is swapped out, MAC addresses change.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Current thread:
- Re: Bit-dumping [Was: Re: Peering Policy]y, (continued)
- Re: Bit-dumping [Was: Re: Peering Policy]y Alan Hannan (Oct 30)
- Re: Bit-dumping [Was: Re: Peering Policy]y Dima Volodin (Oct 30)
- Re: Bit-dumping [Was: Re: Peering Policy]yy Alan Hannan (Oct 30)
- Re: Bit-dumping [Was: Re: Peering Policy]y Jerry Scharf (Oct 30)
- Re: Bit-dumping [Was: Re: Peering Policy] Robert Bowman (Oct 30)
- Re: Bit-dumping [Was: Re: Peering Policy] Robert E. Seastrom (Oct 30)
- Re: Bit-dumping [Was: Re: Peering Policy] Robert Bowman (Oct 30)
- Re: Bit-dumping [Was: Re: Peering Policy] Tony Li (Oct 30)
- Re: Bit-dumping [Was: Re: Peering Policy] Alex.Bligh (Oct 31)
- Re: Bit-dumping [Was: Re: Peering Policy] Tony Li (Oct 30)