On Wednesday 15 April 2009 04:47:49 pm Richard A Steenbergen wrote: > Are you talking about an explicit "then accept" final > term, or an implicit default-action accept?
Explicit. Still debugging... > Once upon a > time I saw a nice table of the protocol-specific > default-action defaults, but I can't find it now as > Juniper's search is returning 99% xml results. You're probably looking for: http://tinyurl.com/d2r94u > On the subject of impossible dreams that would make > troubleshooting these kinds of things easier, it would be > really handy if "test policy" supported policy chains and > logical-routers. Actually it would be nice if you could > change the output from something other than "brief", and > control the input with something more than a single > prefix doing "orlonger" matching too. I wonder why they > didn't just do this as part of "show route" so you get > consistent features? Aye :-). Cheers, Mark.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
