On 02/12/2010 02:18 PM, Brian K. White wrote:
> In the course of talking to Verizon I discovered the off the cuff
> shell/awk loop I used to re-write all my config files at once had a typo
> and created the same exact mac in all config files.
>
> stopped all containers, wrote the intended_non_dupli
Brian K. White wrote:
> Michael H. Warfield wrote:
>> On Fri, 2010-02-12 at 11:37 -0500, Brian K. White wrote:
>>> So my question is, is "02:x:x:x:x:x" in some way non-routable just
>>> because it sets the locally-administered bit?
>> I use that all the time without any problems. It may be someth
Michael H. Warfield wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-02-12 at 11:37 -0500, Brian K. White wrote:
>> So my question is, is "02:x:x:x:x:x" in some way non-routable just
>> because it sets the locally-administered bit?
>
> I use that all the time without any problems. It may be something in
> the way their sw
On Fri, 2010-02-12 at 11:37 -0500, Brian K. White wrote:
> The reason I'm trying to use the new mac numbering scheme in case it's
> not apparent is, an OUI consumes 3 of the available 6 bytes in a mac,
> leaving only 3 to make a unique number out of. Yet IP addresses have 4
> bytes and I want a
I have a host set up with 0.6.5 + force-umount-rootfs.patch and 9
containers.
Bridge/veth networking with all ip's on real internet ip's on a Verizion
FiOS static ip account. (Verizon in this case, supplies essentially a
connection to a switch, there is no customer-side router to provide the
I
