Re: [uml-devel] Randomize on MAC address when bringing up ethernet iface

[Jeff Dike <jdike@addtoit.com>]

On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 08:12:59PM +0200, Blaisorblade wrote:
> I've being thinking to this and I'm wondering why we shouldn't do it. When we
> have set no IP or 0.0.0.0, which is not a unique IP, and we bring it up, we 
> should choose a random MAC to use.
> Conditions: the broadcast bit must be 0 and the "locally-assigned address 
> flag" must be 1 (as likely we already do).

Yeah, this sounds like a good idea.

> For which bits they are, I've a doubt.
> On Tanenbaum's book they're marked as the two most significant (leftmost) bits
> (broadcast being the most significant one), but since we've longly known the 
> broadcast bit is the lowest-order one of the highest bit, I suspect that MACs
> are read in little-endian bit order (which likely implies the same for the 
> whole packets). I can't verify this, but bytes in many fields are moved to be
> in network order i.e. big-endian order (MACs are always used in the network 
> order).

So what is the second bit?  I only know about the broadcast/multicast bit, and
no one has bothered clueing me in on any other special bits :-)

				Jeff


-------------------------------------------------------
All the advantages of Linux Managed Hosting--Without the Cost and Risk!
Fully trained technicians. The highest number of Red Hat certifications in
the hosting industry. Fanatical Support. Click to learn more
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=107521&bid=248729&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
User-mode-linux-devel mailing list
User-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel