From: ccie2be (ccie2be@nyc.rr.com)
Date: Sun Feb 22 2004 - 19:57:33 GMT-3
Hi,
Just thought I would make explicit what your question suggests.
That is when a match command has multiple parameters it's doing a logical
"or" on the parameters. The 2nd format does the same thing.
However, if you need to do a logical "and" you couldn't use either of those
syntaxes. You would have to list multiple match commands like this:
route-map <name>
match <condition1>
match <condition2>
With the above syntax, both condition 1 and 2 must be true for any set
command to execute.
HTH
----- Original Message -----
From: <alsontra@hotmail.com>
To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2004 3:02 PM
Subject: Route-map for multiple interfaces
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Please help support GroupStudy by purchasing your study materials from:
> http://shop.groupstudy.com
>
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Mar 05 2004 - 07:13:55 GMT-3