>I have two parts of a large network, the first part using 141.120.0.0
>thru 141.120.7.255 and the second part using 141.120.128.0 thru
>141.120.135.255. At the router connecting to Internet I want access from
>outside limited only to these subnets and not to other addresses used. I
>know that the
n Behalf Of
Howard C. Berkowitz
Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2001 1:31 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: wildcard in access-list
>I have two parts of a large network, the first part using 141.120.0.0
>thru 141.120.7.255 and the second part using 141.120.128.0 thru
>141.120.135.255
Let's see...
You don't care whether bit 16 (or is that 17 :?) is a 0 or a 1, right?
Then the wildcard bit can be 1 :)
A general statement would be:
If you have two otherwise identical ACL statements with
addresses that differ only in one bit position, then you
can combine the ACLs int
> >Why?
To which Bob Vance responded,
>
>Less processing.
CPU power is cheaper than brainpower, downtime through errors, etc.
>Elegance :)
I've always regarded an elegant solution as one that is necessary
and sufficient for all criteria. Maintainability is a criterion.
>Bob Vance wrote,
>IIRC, at least stating at some IOS version level, this is being done
>automatically for you by IOS when it stores the ACL in the
>configuration. Thus, if you typed:
>
> access-list 101 tcp permit any 141.120.128.0 0.0.135.255
>
>it would actually show up via a 'sh run' a
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Howard C. Berkowitz
Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2001 11:35 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: wildcard in access-list
> >Why?
To which Bob Vance responded,
>
>Less processing.
6 matches
Mail list logo
