I'll bite.  Not being responsible for our network I asked a peer who
is more familiar with it and yes we do allow DNS requests.  DNS servers
are generally located in a DMZ are are not a high security risk.  If you
have no DNS server then you only need to allow replies since you
obviously have nothing to request..

  Dave

Chuck wrote:
> 
> hey Mad Guy, does your organization permit DNS requests from any old place,
> or do you restrict that to sources only within your space?
> 
> Chuck
> trying to drag you into another thread entirely
> 
> ""MADMAN""  wrote in message
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Not in my world:
> >
> > interface Ethernet4/0/0
> >  bandwidth 1000
> >  ip address 172.28.64.11 255.255.255.192
> >  ip access-group 150 in
> >  no ip directed-broadcast
> >  no ip mroute-cache
> > !
> >  access-list 150 deny   tcp host 172.28.56.48 any eq telnet log
> > access-list 150 permit ip any any
> >
> > *Feb 18 12:11:42: %SEC-6-IPACCESSLOGP: list 150 denied tcp
> > 172.28.56.48(57010) -
> > > 172.28.64.11(23), 1 packet
> >
> >   Thank you!!
> >
> >   Dave
> >
> > "Roberts, Larry" wrote:
> > >
> > > The only way that the access-list applied to the inbound interface (
> > non-vty
> > > ) blocked your telnet is if you were trying to telnet
> > > To an address that was not the directly connected address ( loopback or
> far
> > > side serial/ethernet )
> > >
> > > If you were to telnet directly to the interface that the access-list
was
> > > applied to you WOULD get in. Only an access-class applied
> > > To the VTY ports will stop that.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > > Larry
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: MADMAN [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Monday, February 18, 2002 1:05 PM
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: Re: Dening telnet access [7:35628]
> > >
> > > I know it does.  I have, even fairly recently, locked myself out of a
> > router
> > > via an inbound access list applied to an interface,DOH:(  Try again and
> if
> > > it doesn't work I would like to see the config.
> > >
> > >   Are you sure the interface on which you applied the access list is
the
> > > interface you were telneting to/thru??
> > >
> > >   Dave
> > >
> > > Patrick Ramsey wrote:
> > > >
> > > > really?  I have had no luck using inbound acl's to control telnet to
> > > > the
> > > router...I always have to use acc's on the vty's
> > > >
> > > > Is there a trick to this?
> > > >
> > > > -Patrick
> > > >
> > > > >>> MADMAN  02/18/02 12:16PM >>>
> > > > Actually telnet packets are processed by inbound access-list.  Now if
> > > > your refering to outbound access-lists then you would be correct.
> > > >
> > > >   Dave
> > > >
> > > > "Hire, Ejay" wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Because telnet packets destined for the router are not normally
> > > > > processed
> > > > by
> > > > > access-lists.  (i don't understand why not, but hey...)
> > > > >
> > > > > instead do this
> > > > >
> > > > > access-list y deny xx.xx.xx.xx xx.xx.xx.xx
> > > > >
> > > > > line vty 0 n (n = the results of a ?, usually 4) access-class y
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: McHugh Randy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > > > Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2002 4:49 PM
> > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > Subject: Dening telnet access [7:35628]
> > > > >
> > > > > Access list problem:
> > > > >
> > > > > Why does this extended access list not work to deny telnet access
> > > > > applied
> > > > to
> > > > > the internet interface on a 2514?
> > > > >
> > > > > Extended IP access list 199
> > > > > deny tcp any any eq telnet
> > > > >
> > > > > interface Ethernet0
> > > > >
> > > > > ip access-group 199 in
> > > > >
> > > > > I have alot more statments than this and of course the statement
> > > > > access-list 199 permit ip any any
> > > > >
> > > > > to take care of the implicit deny all , but I can still access the
> > > > > router from the internet through telnet. Anyone have any ideas what
> > > > > else might be needed to prevent of selectivly allow telnet access
to
> > > > > my router. Thanks,
> > > > > Randy
> > > > --
> > > > David Madland
> > > > Sr. Network Engineer
> > > > CCIE# 2016
> > > > Qwest Communications Int. Inc.
> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > 612-664-3367
> > > >
> > > > "Emotion should reflect reason not guide it"
> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>  Confidentiality Disclaimer    This email and any files
> > > transmitted with it may contain confidential and /or proprietary
> > information
> > > in the possession of WellStar Health System, Inc. ("WellStar") and is
> > > intended only for the individual or entity to whom addressed.  This
> email
> > > may contain information that is held to be privileged, confidential and
> > > exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this
> message
> > > is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
> > unauthorized
> > > access, dissemination, distribution or copying of any information from
> this
> > > email is strictly prohibited, and may subject you to criminal and/or
> civil
> > > liability. If you have received this email in error, please notify the
> > > sender by reply email and then delete this email and its attachments
> from
> > > your computer. Thank you.
> > > >
> > > > ================================================================
> > >
> > > --
> > > David Madland
> > > Sr. Network Engineer
> > > CCIE# 2016
> > > Qwest Communications Int. Inc.
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 612-664-3367
> > >
> > > "Emotion should reflect reason not guide it"
> > --
> > David Madland
> > Sr. Network Engineer
> > CCIE# 2016
> > Qwest Communications Int. Inc.
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 612-664-3367
> >
> > "Emotion should reflect reason not guide it"
-- 
David Madland
Sr. Network Engineer
CCIE# 2016
Qwest Communications Int. Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
612-664-3367

"Emotion should reflect reason not guide it"




Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=35785&t=35628
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to