From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 00:54:36 +0100
From: Derek Fawcus <dfawcus@cisco.com>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] unique MAC address allocation?
Message-ID: <20050331005435.G22455@mrwint.cisco.com>
References: <bb1951070503300225251fd4fe@mail.gmail.com>
	<424AE928.6000501@zappe.us>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <424AE928.6000501@zappe.us>;
	from zapman@zappe.us on Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 11:00:08AM -0700
Cc:
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 2ed302dc-ead0-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 11:00:08AM -0700, Michael Zappe wrote:
>
> As to question 4, nope.  The OS has no good way of determining a new MAC
> address to override to (The OS doesn't have an OUI, and then how do you
> pick the serial number after that??),

Pick a random number,  set the local allocation bit (second bit on wire)
and then test the address to see if anyone responds to it.

Didn't DECnet do something like that?

DF

> and it's not considered a real
> problem because of the uniqueness of MACs.  Not to mention you don't
> even want to think about how a switch could get confused by the whole
> situation... :-)
>
>     Mike