You are absoklutly right. There is no errata because I have also checked.
What I meant to say is a typo or an error!
Sorry for the confusion.
""Daniel Boutet"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
8ogp33$pkn$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:8ogp33$pkn$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> ok ok ok!!! some of you might think that I was in left field. I think I
know
> where I went wrong.
> I am mixing the 48-bit ethernet address with the conversion process. Let
me
> explain:
>
> I was adding a full "half octet field" 01:00:5e:0 when it is actually just
> one bit (0) from the ethernet address. Group of four bits to convert from
> binary to hex.
>
> I actually discover this by replying to my own question.
> Sorry for using valuable thread!
> Should of tried to understand before asking!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
>
>
> ""Daniel Boutet"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> 8ogo5a$l3h$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:8ogo5a$l3h$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > I wanted to add that there is also an errata to the figure 8-5 page 294
of
> > the BCMSN book by Karen Webb
> > The 48-bit ethernet address should read:
> >
> > 0000 0001 0000 0000 0101 1110 0 which converts to 01:00:5e This
> leaves
> > 23 bit that can be matched to the Ip Multicast least-significant
> > 23 bits.
> >
> >
> > ""Daniel Boutet"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > 8ogm9b$bsb$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:8ogm9b$bsb$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > I am studying for the switching exam and I am converting ip multicast
> > > address to ethernet addresses.
> > > What i don't get is that they state in the Cisco press book (page
> 294/295)
> > > "the least 23 least significant bits of the ip multicast group are
> > place
> > > into the frame..."
> > > "half of the ethernet block 01:00:5e:00:00:00 to 01:00:5e:7f:ff:ff
> > > correspond to ip multicast...."
> > >
> > > I really only use twenty when I am converting from binary to hex.
> > >
> > > Scenario: 224.138.8.5 (to use their example)
> > > 1110 0000 1000 1010 0000 1000 0000 0101
> > > 01:00:5e:0A:08:05
> > >
> > > Since the 01:00:5e:0 are always going to be, then I am only concerned
> > with
> > > the least significant 20. Is this right?
> > >
> > > I did their exercise on page 319/320 and got 100% (their is an errata
> for
> > > one of the address but it is a decimal to binary error) but I did not
> > > use the 01:00:5e:0 as the base but 01:00:5e:
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ___________________________________
> > > UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html
> > > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com
> > > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> >
> >
> > ___________________________________
> > UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html
> > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com
> > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
>
>
> ___________________________________
> UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html
> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com
> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
___________________________________
UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
