From: fingham@xxxxxxx
Date: Mon Jul 15 2002 - 16:38:08 GMT-3
Tom: Not the same function at all, if I understand your question. They are bo
th LSAP access-lists, but only one will allow all the SNA SAP's.
1st access-li 2nd access-list
SAP 0x00 OK (ii desu) NOT OK (dami desu)
0x01 OK NOT OK
0x02 NOT OK NOT OK
0x03 NOT OK NOT OK
0x04 OK NOT OK
. . .
.
0x0C OK OK
0x0D OK OK
0x0E NOT OK NOT OK
0x0F NOT OK NOT OK
. . .
0x11 NOT OK NOT OK
and so on.
HTH, Fred
>
> From: Tom Young <gitsyoung@yahoo.co.jp>
> Date: 2002/07/15 Mon AM 01:46:18 EDT
> To: Fred Ingham <fingham@cox.net>
> CC: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: SNA's access-list
>
> Fred
>
> You are right. But the reason that I ask the question
> is the 00,01,04,05,08,09,0C was included into 0D, so the
> two comand has the same function , right ?
>
> Tom
>
>
>
>
> --- Fred Ingham <fingham@cox.net> $B$+$i$N%a%C%;!<%8!'(B
> > Tom: Not True.
> > The first access list permits the SNA SAPs 00, 01,
> > 04, 05, 08, 09, 0C, and
> > 0D.
> >
> > The second access-list permits SNA SAPs 0D and 0C.
> >
> > Fred
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Tom Young" <gitsyoung@yahoo.co.jp>
> > To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2002 8:54 AM
> > Subject: SNA's access-list
> >
> >
> > > Hi,group
> > >
> > > I think the two access-list below are the same ,
> > for the
> > > SNA packet,right?
> > >
> > > 1,
> > > access-list 200 permit 0x0000 0x0D0D
> > >
> > > 2,
> > > access-list 200 permit 0x0D0D 0x0101
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Sep 07 2002 - 19:36:31 GMT-3