From: kym blair (kymblair@hotmail.com)
Date: Sun Dec 29 2002 - 05:45:52 GMT-3
You're right UDP 11000-11999 are used for voice.
>From: "Fadiltakipte" <fadiltakipte@hotmail.com>
>Reply-To: "Fadiltakipte" <fadiltakipte@hotmail.com>
>To: "Scott Morris" <swm@emanon.com>, <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>Subject: Re: Filtering DLSw+ TCP Session
>Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 22:03:05 -0800
>
>Hi ,
>
>Why did you use the permit tcp any any ge 11000
>As I know filtering TCP 2065 suffices for high priority DLSW.
>I have seen filtering of TCP ge 11000 also for voice configurations. Can
>anybody please inform me what these ports are used for?
>
>Thanks
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Scott Morris" <swm@emanon.com>
>To: "'Jay Greenberg'" <groupstudylist@execulink.com>;
><ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>Sent: Saturday, December 28, 2002 7:11 AM
>Subject: RE: Filtering DLSw+ TCP Session
>
>
> > If you're using priority, you'll also have 1981, 1982 and 1983 as
> > destination ports. And I think there's something about udp connections
> > as well, though I don't have a list of ports for that (dlsw udp-disable
> > turns off as I recall).
> >
> > HTH,
> >
> > Scott
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> > Jay Greenberg
> > Sent: Saturday, December 28, 2002 12:38 AM
> > To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: Filtering DLSw+ TCP Session
> >
> >
> > Any idea how to explicitly allow a DSLw+ TCP session through an ACL? On
> > a recent practice lab, I used:
> >
> > permit tcp any any eq 2065
> > permit tcp any any ge 11000
> >
> > which worked, however I wonder if there is a more practical / direct way
> > of doing this. .
> > .
>.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jan 17 2003 - 17:21:54 GMT-3