For some reason, this thread makes me think about the all zeros broadcast. And how glad I am that it's not used anymore. That would confuse the hell outta me. Wonder if Howard's explanation might be the reason why all zero's was done at one time. Oh well, just another item to think about.
wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Hi All, > > I am trying to find out why we do an inverse/wildcard > masks while using access lists? > > For example, if I want to deny 192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0 > network, on the access list, we configure this > as 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.255, but why do we do it this > way instead of 255.255.255.0. > > All this seems to be is just an inverse relationship pointing back at the > same thing? Even if I want to get specific and deny 192.168.1.0 > 255.255.255.192, this translates to 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.63, which seems to be > just the standard mask and subtract 255.255.255.255. > > Is there a specific reason why we do inverse mask? It seems to be easier > just to configure it with normal masks. This way, we skip on an extra > procedure. > > thanks > Mike Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=30491&t=30473 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
