Dave Katz <dkatz@cisco.com> Wed, 20 April 1994 23:48 UTC

Date: Wed, 20 Apr 1994 13:08:00 -0700
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Dave Katz <dkatz@cisco.com>
Message-Id: <199404202008.NAA12851@feta.cisco.com>
To: Sam.Wilson@edinburgh.ac.uk
Cc: Big-Internet@munnari.oz.au
In-Reply-To: Sam Wilson's message of 20 Apr 94 19:06:47 BST <9404201906.aa02986@uk.ac.ed.festival>

I've got an I-D out on this very subject that expands on this
mechanism (draft-ietf-tuba-addr-assign-00.txt).  But yes, they use AFI
49 (local scope) addresses if there is no other information available.

   Date: 20 Apr 94 19:06:47 BST
   From: Sam Wilson <ercm20@festival.ed.ac.uk>
   Reply-To: Sam.Wilson@edinburgh.ac.uk

   Dave Katz wrote:
   > CLNP/ESIS reverts to ARP-like behavior in this case [no router], by having the ES
   > multicast the data packet onto the local LAN;  the destination ES sends
   > back a unicast ES Hello and then everybody does the right thing.

   In DECnet/OSI (aka Phase V) the documents claim that ES-IS is used to
   give the non-local part of the NSAP (IDP+area) to the ES.  Presumably in
   the no-router case the ESs just use NSAPs with fudged non-local parts in
   the same sort of way that AppleTalk configures itself in the absence of
   a router.  Yes?

   Sam Wilson
   Network Services Division
   Computing Services, The University of Edinburgh
   Edinburgh, Scotland, UK

Dave Katz
ercm20
Dave Katz
Sam Wilson