Re: MAC Address Incrementor

You have an off-by-one error. Specifying one increment shows the start value and no increments.

>perl macIncrementor.pl 65535 1 2
00:00:00:00:FF:FF       <-- Should be 00:00:00:01:00:00
00:00:00:01:00:00       <-- Should be 00:00:00:01:00:01
[download]

It really sucks to have to convert the address to decimal before being able to use the program.

>perl macIncrementor.pl 999 1 2
00:00:00:00:03:E7
00:00:00:00:03:E8       <-- Should be 00:00:00:00:09:9A
[download]

And most importantly, it only works for 0.000015 of the address space on a 32-bit Perl.

>perl macIncrementor.pl 17179869184 1 2
00:00:FF:FF:FF:FF
00:00:FF:FF:FF:FF       <-- Should be 00:04:00:00:00:01
[download]

Comment on Re: MAC Address Incrementor Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: MAC Address Incrementor by wilcoxc (Initiate) on Mar 11, 2008 at 05:14 UTC
Ikegami, thanks a ton for the comments! I designed this script for testing where I wanted to use contiguous MAC addresses on a traffic generator. To give it an easy naming convention, I based it on a decimal for a subnet feel. I had intended to print the start value into a hex/MAC format, and then increment from there. My solution for the one-off error will be to not include the start value as an increment iteration. Any ideas on how to correct the conversion beyond 17179869184. I'm not sure how to fix this one. Again, I greatly appreciate the feedback!!!	[reply]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^2: MAC Address Incrementor
by wilcoxc (Initiate) on Mar 11, 2008 at 05:14 UTC

I designed this script for testing where I wanted to use contiguous MAC addresses on a traffic generator. To give it an easy naming convention, I based it on a decimal for a subnet feel. I had intended to print the start value into a hex/MAC format, and then increment from there.
My solution for the one-off error will be to not include the start value as an increment iteration.

Any ideas on how to correct the conversion beyond 17179869184. I'm not sure
how to fix this one.

[reply]