From: Henk de Tombe (henk.de.tombe@qi.nl)
Date: Sun Oct 23 2005 - 05:11:06 GMT-3
Hi,
You can summarize to 10.1.4.0 & 10.1.5.0 in a single standard ACL entry. The
standard ACL in this example will match everything between /23 and /32. See
the output below, this implementation can lead to routes being marked with a
weigth of 10 which have a other mask length.
A prefix list or a special extended ACL will force /24 mask to be marked
with a weight of 10.
RTR02#sh ip bgp
BGP table version is 6, local router ID is 150.1.2.2
Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best, i -
internal,
r RIB-failure, S Stale
Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete
Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path
*> 10.1.4.0/25 150.1.7.7 0 10 64517 i
*> 10.1.4.128/25 150.1.7.7 0 10 64517 i
*> 10.1.5.0/24 150.1.7.7 0 10 64517 i
RTR02#sh route-map
route-map test, permit, sequence 10
Match clauses:
ip address (access-lists): 1
Set clauses:
weight 10
Policy routing matches: 0 packets, 0 bytes
RTR02#sh access-list
Standard IP access list 1
10 permit 10.1.4.0, wildcard bits 0.0.1.255 (4 matches)
Regards,
Henk
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] Namens
jnkmail4eva@yahoo.com
Verzonden: zaterdag 22 oktober 2005 21:09
Aan: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Onderwerp: Summarization confusion ..
I have 2 neworks and i want to summarize them ..
10.1.4.0 /24
10.1.5.0 /24
10 . 1. 0000 010 | 0. 0000 0000
10 . 1. 0000 010 | 1. 0000 0000
-------------------|--------------
255. 255. 254 | 0
I can summarize it 10.1.4.0/22
I would like to use it in an acl for setting metric for those 2 routes ..
access-list 1 permit ip 10.1.4.0 0.0.1.255 any Is the wildcard mask correct
in acl 1 for those 2 routes ?
route-map test permit 10
match ip address 1
set weight 10
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Nov 06 2005 - 22:00:52 GMT-3