From: Price, Jamie (jprice@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Wed May 10 2000 - 19:46:58 GMT-3
Title: RE: route-map question
Correct me if I'm wrong but actually the implicit deny only pertains
to the route-maps used in route redistribution. If a route doesnt
match the route map then it is not redistributed.
If the route-map is being used for policy routing (ie setting an IP
nexthop to override routing decisions) then the suggested implicit
deny does not apply in the literal sense. In such a scenario packets
that do not meet a parameter in the route map will be routed normally.
Jamie
-----Original Message-----
From: John Conzone
To: Vijay Venkatesh; Kevin Young
Cc: ccielab
Sent: 5/10/00 5:04 PM
Subject: Re: route-map question
Correct. Thee is an implicit deny at the end so you would need a
route
map xxxx permit 20 to allow the rest of the stuff through.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vijay Venkatesh" <vijay.venkatesh@usa.net>
To: "Kevin Young" <kvyoung@sina.com>
Cc: "ccielab" <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2000 10:32 AM
Subject: Re: route-map question
> I beleive if you want to let the other packets not matched to pass
> through then you would need the permit 20. Anything that is matched
will
> be processed through the set staement.
>
> Vijay.
>
>
> Kevin Young wrote:
> >
> > Hi, everyone
> >
> > I have a question wish some help me,
> > when need to add a null route-map permit xx(instance)
> > in the end of a route-map? such as:
> > route-map abc permit 10
> > match xxx
> > set xxx
> > should i must append a null route-map abc permit 20 in the end?
which
situation needs?
> >
> > thanks a lot
> >
> > **************************************
> > Kevin Young
> > Senior Network Engineer
> > Yinxi Electronic Information Co.,Ltd
> > (86)-10-82625798 x 810
> > **************************************
> >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:23:28 GMT-3