Sorry guys, I spotted my mistake! Thanks for helping me see clearly Bob! Couldn't see the wood for the google!
Vrrp packets ARE sent to the multicast Ip and MAC, but sourced from 0000.5e ... Etc.. Sorry On Oct 20, 2012 9:20 PM, "Bob McCouch" <[email protected]> wrote: > Because the RFC says so: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3768#section-7.3 > > :-) > > Actually I'd say it's because it's not *really* a multicast MAC address. > It's closer to an Anycast address in concept. Intentional collision in > order to provide a redundant service. And Anycast addresses (to continue > the metaphor) are actually unicast addresses, not multicast ones. > > Among other things, Cisco switches get rather upset at the idea of binding > a unicast IP address to a multicast MAC address (in that, they won't do it > -- it's one reason Microsoft NLB is such a pain). Perhaps the protocol > designers decided to make sure such conflicts weren't a problem. > > > > On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Mark Beynon <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Hopefully a simple question, but I can't find the answer and i'm hoping >> the >> wider collective can... >> >> Multicast IP addresses derive multicast MAC addresses, which start >> 0100.5e. >> >> So why is the vrrp MAC 0000.5e00.01xx?? (not 0100.5e etc) >> >> ? >> >> Thanks >> _______________________________________________ >> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please >> visit www.ipexpert.com >> >> Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out >> www.PlatinumPlacement.com >> >> http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs >> > > _______________________________________________ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs
