From: CCIE Candidate (ccie2001ca@xxxxxxxx)
Date: Wed Dec 12 2001 - 18:07:53 GMT-3
what I am thinking is that why we are monitoring only
destination port numbers for some ports(1981,1982 etc)
where with 2065, we are monitoring both source and
destination port.
KJ
--- Denise Donohue <fradendon@home.com> wrote:
> DLSW messages are going to and from the router, with
> a destination port of
> 2065 each way. So you want to specify packets sent
> from anywhere going to
> port 2065, and packets from anywhere going to port
> 2065. Does that answer
> your question?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com
> [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
> CCIE Candidate
> Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 11:59 AM
> To: McCallum, Robert; 'Richard Gallagher'
> Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: Custom queue-list for DLSW
>
>
> Now it raises a question in my mind about the
> access-list. Why we have to use two different lines
> for port 2065 instead of using a single line like
> this
>
> access-list 101 permit tcp any any eq 2065
> (we did the same for other protocols ?)
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> KJ
>
>
>
> --- "McCallum, Robert"
> <Robert.McCallum@let-it-be-thus.com> wrote:
> > well well well... you learn something new every
> day!
> >
> > Cheers Rich
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Richard Gallagher
> [mailto:rgallagh@cisco.com]
> > Sent: 12 December 2001 16:13
> > To: David Vu; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: Re: Custom queue-list for DLSW
> >
> >
> > David,
> >
> > "dlsw" keyword is only for FST encapsulation, for
> > TCP you need to specify all
> > the ports involved.
> >
> > Rich
> > CCIE #7211
> >
> > On Dec 12, 9:38am, David Vu chatted about:
> > > Subject:Custom queue-list for DLSW
> > > In bootcamp lab 20, it asks you to do a custom
> > queue with
> > >
> > > 50% on DLSW
> > > 25% on IP
> > > 25% on IPX
> > >
> > > For DLSW, the solution is
> > > access-list 101 permit tcp any eq 2065 any
> > > access-list 101 permit tcp any any eq 2065
> > > access-list 101 permit tcp any any eq 2067
> > > access-list 101 permit tcp any any eq 1981
> > > access-list 101 permit tcp any any eq 1982
> > > access-list 101 permit tcp any any eq 1983
> > > queue-list 1 protocol ip 1 list 101
> > >
> > > Would it be easier to do "queue-list 1 protocol
> > dlsw 1" instead of using an
> > > access-list?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:32:42 GMT-3