Route-map for multiple interfaces

From: alsontra@hotmail.com
Date: Sat Feb 21 2004 - 17:02:29 GMT-3

• Next message: Michael Snyder: "RE: BGP aggregate quiz"
• Previous message: Alec: "BGP aggregate quiz"
• Next in thread: Michael Snyder: "RE: Route-map for multiple interfaces"
• Maybe reply: Michael Snyder: "RE: Route-map for multiple interfaces"
• Maybe reply: ccie2be: "Re: Route-map for multiple interfaces"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Group,
         Both of these statements are functional and seem to provide the
desired function. Is there any reason why I shouldn't use the first
statement?

route-map get_the_connected permit 10
 match interface Loopback0 Ethernet0/0 Serial0/1

VS.

route-map get_the_connected permit 10
 match interface Loopback0
route-map get_the_connected permit 20
 match interface Ethernet0/0
route-map get_the_connected permit 30
 match interface Serial0/1

Alsontra

• Next message: Michael Snyder: "RE: BGP aggregate quiz"
• Previous message: Alec: "BGP aggregate quiz"
• Next in thread: Michael Snyder: "RE: Route-map for multiple interfaces"
• Maybe reply: Michael Snyder: "RE: Route-map for multiple interfaces"
• Maybe reply: ccie2be: "Re: Route-map for multiple interfaces"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Mar 05 2004 - 07:13:54 GMT-3