From: Danny Muizebelt (Danny.Muizebelt@osiatis.at)
Date: Thu Oct 13 2005 - 05:25:41 GMT-3
Hi group,
While reading through the ODR documents I encountered a route
distribution example where they used extended access-lists. (See
Cut/Paste below)
The reason I'm avoiding extended access-lists with route redistribution
is that it's for me unclear what roles the source and destination part
play. I only want to identify a network, there is no "source" or
"destination" to speak of.
So, are extended access-lists a big NoNo when using them with
redistribution or do they really have their place in the routing
processes?
From Cisco.com:
Examples
In the following example, an ODR process is enabled, a distribution list
is configured to filter routes learned from ODR stub peers, and
redistribution statement is configured under the Open Shortest Path
First (OSPF) routing process:
Router(config)# access-list 101 permit ip host 10.0.0.1 192.168.1.0
0.0.0.255
Router(config)# access-list 101 permit ip 10.0.10.2 255.0.0.0
192.168.2.0 0.0.0.255
Router(config)# router odr
Router(config-router)# distribute-list 101 in
Router(config-router)# exit
Router(config-router)# router ospf 1
Router(config-router)# redistribute odr subnets
Many thanks,
Danny
Diese Information ist vertraulich und ausschlie_lich zur Kenntnisnahme durch den (die) genannten Adressaten bestimmt.
Wenn Sie nicht der vorgesehene Adressat sind, informieren sie uns bitte unverz|glich.
The information herein is confidential and intended solely for the attention and use of the named addressee(s).
If you are not the intended recipient please inform us immediately.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Nov 06 2005 - 22:00:50 GMT-3