From: Mihai Dumitru (mihai@doi.ro)
Date: Wed Mar 01 2006 - 08:27:45 GMT-3
On 3/1/06, Cisco certification <ccielab@groupstudy.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> You have tried to post to a GroupStudy.com certification mailing list.
> Because
> the server does not recognize you as a confirmed poster, you will be
> required
> to authenticate that you are using a valid e-mail address and are not a
> spammer. By confirming this e-mail you certify that you are not sending
> Unsolicited Bulk Email (UBE).
>
> PLEASE DO NOT SEND YOUR ORIGINAL MESSAGE AGAIN! BY CONFIRMING THIS EMAIL
> YOUR ORIGINAL MESSAGE (WHICH IS NOW QUEUED IN THE SERVER) WILL BE POSTED.
>
>
> By confirming this e-mail you also certify the following:
>
> 1. The message does NOT break Cisco's Non-Disclosure requirements.
>
> 2. The message is NOT designed to advertise a commercial product.
>
> 3. You understand all postings become property of GroupStudy.com
>
> 4. You have searched the archives prior to posting.
>
> 5. The message is NOT inflammatory.
>
> 6. The message is NOT a test message.
>
> To confirm, simply reply to this message. No editing is necessary. Once
> confirmed, you will be able to post without additional confirmations.
>
>
> Welcome to GroupStudy.com!
>
>
> First time posters to GroupStudy.com are required to agree to the
> GroupStudy terms and conditions.
> Replying to this email, certifies you have read and agree to the
> GroupStudy posting guidelines and terms and conditions.
>
> --- Original Message Follows ---
>
> Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2006 13:13:17 +0200
> From: "Mihai Dumitru" <mihai@doi.ro>
> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: restrict vty access to the management vlan/vrf only
>
> Hi,
>
> Is there a better way to restrict access to the VTY lines from certain
> VRFs/ VLANs, other than using ACLs/VACLs? I think that ACLs might not
> be effective because of overlapping address space and possible
> performance degradation.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mihai
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 01 2006 - 10:07:37 GMT-3