From: Chris Hugo (chrishugo@yahoo.com)
Date: Sat Sep 14 2002 - 21:56:49 GMT-3
TCP 2067 Is not needed Dmitry. Which causes confusion on me sometimes also when I'm trying to memorize all of these bloody ports. Because this is a TCP connection we have to look at it a little differently The Write port is 2067 but when it sends to another host (router) the destination port is 2065. Yes this is the read port on the remote host. Therefore we should only look out for 2065 (Destination Port. I am not sure if the routers ever randomize the source port. I never sniffed with the intent to look at the source port. I can tell you that I have went to some scenarios that I had access-lists on some interfaces and the only allow statement that I needed to create was to allow port 2065 comming in and it worked just fine.
access-list 100 permit tcp any any eq 2065
I did not talk about priority but my same theory applys on these ports also if you have priority enabled.
hth,
chris hugo
"Volkov, Dmitry (Toronto - BCE)" wrote:yes Nick,
Agree, probably it would be cleaner not to put 1981-83.
Well, will it be correct method to put TCP 2067 as well by either way ?
for normal dlsw (without priority) I would configure:
queue-list 1 protocol ip 1 tcp 2065
queue-list 1 protocol ip 1 tcp 2067
Dmitry
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nick Shah [mailto:nshah@connect.com.au]
> Sent: Saturday, September 14, 2002 6:25 PM
> To: warren perrett; dmitry_volkov@ca.ml.com; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: queue list for DLSW (search - just GREAT !!!)
>
>
>
> * priority dlsw uses 1981, 1982, 1983, 2065, so either
> Dmitry's method or
> Warren's method can be implemented to include them
>
> * A correct method is 'not' to use 1981, 1982, 1983 in
> 'non-priority' DLSW,
> imho, they will be considered wrong.
>
> rgds
> Nick
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: warren perrett
> To: ;
> Sent: Saturday, September 14, 2002 10:22 PM
> Subject: Re: queue list for DLSW (search - just GREAT !!!)
>
>
> > There seems to be two ways to tie the ports to a queue the
> way you have
> > below or :
> >
> >
> >
> > (config)#queue-list 1 protocol ip 1 tcp 2065
> >
> > (config)#queue-list 1 protocol ip 1 tcp 2067
> >
> > Have a look at the text when you issue a ? after the ip 1 see below
> >
> > (config)#queue-list 1 protocol ip 1 ?
> >
> >
> >
> > tcp Prioritize TCP packets 'to' or 'from' the specified port
> >
> > udp Prioritize UDP packets 'to' or 'from' the specified port
> >
> > As it says here 'to' or 'from' the port, I think either way
> is valid , as
> > usual the qestion is which way is the cisco way :)
> >
> > My SNA notes refer to the method above
> >
> > I would agree your ACL covers all DLSW ports inc 1981,1982,
> and 1983 if
> > you issuse the priority command. If you don't issue the
> priority command
> > only 2065 is used , but should you inc 1981,1982,1983 for
> completeness ?
> >
> > On one hand it would do no harm but on the other the
> examiners may feel
> > your just guessing . What should you do ? I don't know I'm afraid.
> >
> > In that instance I would have to ask the proctor and
> explain my thoughts.
> >
> >
> >
> > >From: "Volkov, Dmitry (Toronto - BCE)" >Reply-To: "Volkov, Dmitry
> > (Toronto - BCE)" >To: "'ccielab@groupstudy.com'" >Subject:
> queue list for
> > DLSW (search - just GREAT !!!) >Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002
> 17:33:03 -0400 >
> > >Some time ago Sasa Milic posted about "protocol dlsw" in
> "queue-list 1
> > >protocol dlsw"
> > >http://www.groupstudy.com/archives/ccielab/200205/msg01804.html
> > >"protocol dlsw" can be used only with FST encapsulation. -
> Can somebody
> > else >confirm that ?! >If you use TCP, then you have to use
> access-list
> > to identify port(s) > >What is the common opinion with you:
> > >Will this
> > access list cover all TCP DLSW (including priority) ? " >
> >access-list
> > 100 permit tcp any eq 2065 any >access-list 100 permit tcp
> any any eq
> > 2065 >access-list 100 permit tcp any any eq 2067
> >access-list 100 permit
> > tcp any any eq 1981 >access-list 100 permit tcp any any eq 1982
> > >access-list 100 permit tcp any any eq 1983 > >Thanks, > >Dmitry
> >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> >
> > Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: Click Here
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! News - Today's headlines
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Oct 07 2002 - 07:43:52 GMT-3