From: KK FoK (rgb98a@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Sun Feb 10 2002 - 07:15:17 GMT-3
Sorry that I forgot to mention this is only good for BGP.
>From: "KK FoK" <rgb98a@hotmail.com>
>Reply-To: "KK FoK" <rgb98a@hotmail.com>
>To: avantus1@hotmail.com, troy@onenet.net, sam_pilot@hotmail.com
>CC: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>Subject: Re: Access-list
>Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2002 17:16:25 +0800
>
>You may try an extended access-list
>
>access-list 100 permit ip 170.10.0.0 0.0.255.0 255.255.255.0 0.0.0.0
>
>
>>From: "Kang BS" <avantus1@hotmail.com>
>>Reply-To: "Kang BS" <avantus1@hotmail.com>
>>To: troy@onenet.net, sam_pilot@hotmail.com
>>CC: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>>Subject: Re: Access-list
>>Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2002 16:30:20 +0900
>>
>>Thank you all,
>>
>>I'd like to clarify my question more detail.
>>
>>- I have 5 routes
>> 170.10.1.0 /24
>> 170.10.2.0 /24
>> 170.10.3.0 /24
>> 170.10.16.0 /20
>> 170.10.32.0 /20
>>- I want to permit only 170.10.x.0 /24 ( x is 1,2,3 here, but can be any
>>number)
>> and deny any routes with subnet mask other than /24 (here
>>170.10.16.0/20,
>> 170.10.32.0/20)
>>
>>this is my question.
>>and prefix-list is working well.
>>
>>thanks
>>
>>BS Kang
>>
>>>From: Troy Rader <troy@onenet.net>
>>>To: Sam Pilot <sam_pilot@hotmail.com>
>>>CC: avantus1@hotmail.com
>>>Subject: Re: Access-list
>>>Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2002 16:15:21 -0600 (CST)
>>>
>>>I'm not exactly sure why he included the /24 and then asked for help with
>>>a mask. I ignored the /24 and assumed that the x meant the 3rd octet was
>>>anything (range 0 - 255) and that by stating a 0 in the 4th octet, he
>>>meant that it MUST be a zero and only a zero. With a /32, it would imply
>>>a single host, and the x implies NOT a single host, so I think that x and
>>>/32 are not compatible.
>>>
>>>I think we agree, but just aren't clear on what he REALLY meant. :)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>On Fri, 8 Feb 2002, Sam Pilot wrote:
>>>
>>> > Troy
>>> >
>>> > I understand what you say but if Kang wanted to permit "170.10.x.0",
>>then
>>> > he would have said 170.10.x.0/32 and not 170.10.x.0/24...
>>> > the 24 bit mask at the end should mean the entire network..
>>> >
>>> > anyway i guess Kang would be able to clarify the issue..
>>> > this issue had me refreshing my wildcard mask concepts ... :-)
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > ----- Original Message -----
>>> > From: "Troy Rader" <troy@onenet.net>
>>> > To: "Sam Pilot" <sam_pilot@hotmail.com>
>>> > Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 4:31 PM
>>> > Subject: Re: Access-list
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > > Download the free utilities from www.boson.com. This is what
>>>cleared
>>it
>>> > > up for me. In this example, the 0 in the 4th octet must be a 0 but
>>the
>>> > > 3rd octet can vary.
>>> > >
>>> > > 170.10.0-255.0 is the range. To mask this is 0.0.255.0.
>>> > >
>>> > > It's not so much a real ip range as a challenge of your bit level
>>> > > understanding.
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > On Fri, 8 Feb 2002, Sam Pilot wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > > they wouldnt it say 170.10.x.0/32
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > ----- Original Message -----
>>> > > > From: "Troy Rader" <troy@onenet.net>
>>> > > > To: "fathnallah said" <sfathallah@mail.cbi.net.ma>
>>> > > > Cc: "Kang BS" <avantus1@hotmail.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>>> > > > Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 3:56 PM
>>> > > > Subject: Re: Access-list
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > I think he is looking for:
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > access-list 1 permit 170.10.0.0 0.0.255.0
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > It appears in his post that the 4th octet MUST be a zero.
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > On Fri, 8 Feb 2002, fathnallah said wrote:
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > > access-list 1 permit 170.10.0.0 0.0.255.255
>>> > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
>>> > > > > > From: Kang BS <avantus1@hotmail.com>
>>> > > > > > To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>>> > > > > > Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 2:14 AM
>>> > > > > > Subject: Access-list
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > Could you anyone help me on access-list?
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > - only permit 170.10.x.0 /24 'x' is any number.
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > thank you in advance
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > BS Kang
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 20 2002 - 13:46:18 GMT-3