Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
Yes, this was the main motivation to start 1904.2.
-Glen
From: Curtis Knittle <C.Knittle@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In fact, isn’t this what led us down the road to 1904.2?
From: Glen Kramer <000006d1020766de-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
No, not allowed per 802.3, Clause 57:
-Glen
From: Kevin Noll <kevin.noll@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Glen,
Is it allowed for an OAMPDU to have a destination MAC address that is NOT SP_MAC_ADDR, but is the MAC address of the destination OAM peer?
For example:
Given two IEEE 802.3 Clause 57 OAM Sublayer entities: OAM Peer A and OAM Peer Z
What is the expected behavior at OAM Peer Z, if OAM Peer A sends an OAMPDU with SRC_ADDR==OAM Peer A and DST_ADDR==OAM Peer Z ??
Will OAM Peer Z correctly receive and process the OAMPDU? Will it drop the OAMPDU? Will it do something else?
-- Kevin A. Noll To unsubscribe from the STDS-1904-2-TF list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-1904-2-TF&A=1 To unsubscribe from the STDS-1904-2-TF list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-1904-2-TF&A=1 |
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature