From: Montiean (noktes@bellsouth.net)
Date: Wed Jul 20 2005 - 14:44:20 GMT-3
Hi Tim,
I lab it up and it does not affect any thing. Are you trying to check
something?
interface Serial0/0
no ip address
ip access-group 55 in
ip access-group 55 out
encapsulation frame-relay IETF
no fair-queue
no frame-relay inverse-arp
frame-relay lmi-type cisco
!
interface Serial0/0.4 point-to-point
ip address 10.110.110.6 255.255.255.0
frame-relay interface-dlci 604
!
interface Serial0/0.7 point-to-point
ip address 10.100.100.6 255.255.255.0
frame-relay interface-dlci 607
r6#show access-li 55
Standard IP access list 55
10 deny any log
r6#ping 10.110.110.4
Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 10.110.110.4, timeout is 2 seconds:
!!!!!
Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 4/5/8 ms
r6#ping 10.100.100.7
Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 10.100.100.7, timeout is 2 seconds:
!!!!!
Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 32/33/36 ms
HTH,
Montiean
----- Original Message -----
From: "ccie2be" <ccie2be@nyc.rr.com>
To: "Group Study" <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 5:57 AM
Subject: acl placement
> Hi guys,
>
> Let's say I have a f/r hub and spoke topology where the hub has 2 p2p
> sub-interfaces.
>
> I also have to filter the same traffic from both spokes.
>
> If I apply the acl to the physical interface will that have the same
effect
> as applying the acl to both sub-interfaces?
>
> Sorry for posting this but at the moment I can't test this myself.
>
> TIA, Tim
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Sep 04 2005 - 17:00:30 GMT-3