Don't think my last post got through, so I'll shorten it now... I think your address and wildcard mask should be 10.10.0.200 0.0.255.7 (If the non-contiguous masks are still accepted).
Regards, Gaz ""Bill"" wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > should work fine. > > You can also test this out by sending a constant data stream via ftp or > something and then start a voice conversation. > > ""dj"" wrote in message > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > I'm setting up LLQ over hub-'n-spoke frame-relay WAN and want to use the > > following funky looking access-list to mark voice packets for the high > > priority queue. This access-list logically works, but my question is: > > Is this legal? > > access-list 101 permit ip any 10.10.X.201 0.0.255.248 precedence > > critical > > > > I have 8 IP phones at each remote site starting at 4th octet IP address > > of 201 (thru 208). > > Each remote site is on a class C network, where the 3rd octet IP address > > labeled X is designated as the site location. > > eg: 10.10.1.0/24 is site 1; 10.10.2.0/24 is site 2; 10.10.3.0/24 is > > site 3, etc. > > > > Will the IOS allow this non-conventional access-list to work per my > > intensions? > > > > regards, > > dj Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=66875&t=66769 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
