Re: [mcnet4l-devel] eui-48 and moniker conversion.

[Mark H. <mar...@mv...>]

Daniel Stodden wrote:

> Mark Huth <mar...@mv...> writes:
>
> > Hi, Daniel, et al..
> >
> > We fixed the byte ordering, although it would be incorrect to refer to it as
> > big endian or little endian, since the moniker is a string of octets, and not a
> > number.
>
> i know. but according to the definition of company_id and oui, eui
> (not mac) addresses _are_ binary numbers (that's the only difference
> between oui and company_id). in fact, that's the only definition which
> distinguishes mac-48 from eui-48 -- apart from the application
> statement.
>
> and that's where describing a 2.14 moniker as eui-48 instead of mac-48
> actually seems right. in my understanding of 2.14 monikers,
> interpretation as a binary number (and in-memory value) instead of an
> octet string has been perfectly intentional ( "a moniker is a 64-bit
> value.." ). otherwise the original ordering would never have made any
> sense at all.

Could be the spec is not consistent.  The drawing shows it as an array of bytes.
Otherwise the 64-bit value would just be a 64-bit number, like addresses, for
example.  It is really intended as an extension of the MAC address concept.  The EUI
description was, unfortunately, not adequately reviewed.

Mark Huth

>
>
> according to the ieee faq[1], the term "company_id" stems from IEEE
> Std 1212-1991, IEEE Standard Control and Status Register (CSR)
> Architecture.
> to me this looks like EUI was originally defined with in-memory
> locations in mind, in contrast to 802's MAC being a sequence with a
> focus of bitwise serialization.
>
> regards,
> dns
>
> --
> ___________________________________________________________________________
>  mailto:st...@in...
>
> _______________________________________________
> mcnet4l-devel mailing list
> mcn...@li...
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mcnet4l-devel