Digging some more, I realized that there is indeed an inconsistency in the tutorial.
The text says - "A unique EUI-64 value is generated by concatenating the OUI, an FFFE valued label, and the extension identifier values. The (MAC-48 like) transmission-ordered binary representation for this encapsulated MAC-48 identifier is listed below:". The examples show FFFF. I think the general protocol is that we should go with the text. I tried looking in the archives but could not find any emails clarifying this inconsistency..... Regards CP > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chirayu Patel > Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2003 8:06 AM > To: 'Suresh Krishnan (QB/LMC)' > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: RFC 3513 EUI-48/MAC-48 confusion > > Hi, > > Can you quote the text from > (http://standards.ieee.org/regauth/oui/tutorials/EUI64.html) which you > think > is contradicting Appendix A of RFC3513. > > As per my understanding, the two match. Section "Encapsulated MAC-48 > values" > in the tutorial says the same thing as Appendix A, which is to place the > bytes 0xff, and 0xfe between the OUI id (company id of 3 bytes), and > extension identifier (vendor supplied id of 3 byes). The same procedure > applies to EUI-48 ids. > > Regards > CP > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner- > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Suresh Krishnan (QB/LMC) > > Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2003 2:46 AM > > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > > Subject: RFC 3513 EUI-48/MAC-48 confusion > > > > Hi Folks, > > Maybe this has been raised before, but I have not found any answers. > > Appendix A of RFC 3513 has the following text > > > > <<<< FROM RFC3513 > > Links or Nodes with IEEE 802 48 bit MAC's > > > > [EUI64] defines a method to create a IEEE EUI-64 identifier from an > > IEEE 48bit MAC identifier. This is to insert two octets, with > > hexadecimal values of 0xFF and 0xFE, in the middle of the 48 bit MAC > > (between the company_id and vendor supplied id). For example, the 48 > > bit IEEE MAC with global scope > > <<<< FROM RFC3513 > > > > The referred document [EUI64] talks about a different method of creating > > EU-I64s from MAC-48s. The procedure followed in the RFC seems to be the > > one recommended for EUI-48s. Is this the intended behaviour? > > > > Thanks > > Suresh > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List > > IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng > > FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng > > Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List > IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng > FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng > Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
