Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jul 9, 2020. It is now read-only.

Explain L2 unicast behavior #48

Open
bocon13 opened this issue May 7, 2019 · 0 comments
Open

Explain L2 unicast behavior #48

bocon13 opened this issue May 7, 2019 · 0 comments
Assignees

Comments

@bocon13
Copy link
Member

bocon13 commented May 7, 2019

Packets with missing entries are not flooded, like a normal L2 switch.

They are dropped so that we can show unicast rules more easily.

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants