From: Ramanpreet Singh (sikandar.raman@gmail.com)
Date: Mon Mar 31 2008 - 13:10:06 ART
i am sorry , you are right :p
On 3/31/08, Ramanpreet Singh <sikandar.raman@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> i think you meant 3,4 and 6th? right?
>
> On 3/30/08, Shine Joseph <shinepjoseph@iprimus.com.au> wrote:
> >
> > Mike,
> >
> >
> >
> > No. you can ahave any value from 0 to 255 for the wild cards. I will
> > give
> > you a couple of examples.
> >
> >
> >
> > The wild card 12 is valid, but would match only the 3rd and 4th bits
> > from
> > LSB - from right most.
> >
> > That is, when you write them in binary, it becomes
> >
> > 0000 0000 - 0
> >
> > 0000 0100 - 4
> >
> > 0000 1000 - 8
> >
> > 0000 1100 - 12
> >
> >
> >
> > So when you use this wild card in an access-list it matches only these 4
> > addresses.
> >
> >
> >
> > A wild card of 44 means either 0 or 1 on the bit positions 3, 5, 6 or
> > in
> > binary
> >
> >
> >
> > 0000 0000 - 0
> >
> > 0000 0100 - 4
> >
> > 0000 1000 - 8
> >
> > 0000 1100 - 12
> >
> > 0010 0000 - 32
> >
> > 0010 0100 - 36
> >
> > 0010 1000 - 40
> >
> > 0010 1100 - 44
> >
> >
> >
> > Thus, the wild card of 44 matches the above 8 addresses.
> >
> >
> >
> > HTH,
> >
> > Shine
> >
> >
> >
> > _____
> >
> > From: Mike Haddad [mailto:mike.haddad@hotmail.com]
> > Sent: Monday, 31 March 2008 11:51 AM
> > To: Shine Joseph; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: RE: Multicast Grouping
> >
> >
> >
> > Hello Shine,
> >
> > You're right and as long as I understand the valid wildcards are : 1 3 7
> > 15 31 63 127 and 255. So using a wild card of 12 is considered invalid?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> >
> > > From: shinepjoseph@iprimus.com.au
> > > To: mike.haddad@hotmail.com; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > > Subject: RE: Multicast Grouping
> > > Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 22:09:38 +1100
> > >
> > > Mike,
> > >
> > > Write them in binary.
> > > 226 - 1110 0010
> > > 12 - 0000 1100
> > >
> > > The possible combinations would be:
> > > 1110 0010 - 226
> > > 1110 0110 - 230
> > > 1110 1010 - 234
> > > 1110 1110 - 238
> > >
> > > So by having a mask of 12 you are are matching only above 4 addresses.
> > >
> > > HTH,
> > > Shine
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
> > Of
> > Mike
> > > Haddad
> > > Sent: Sunday, 30 March 2008 5:55 PM
> > > To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > > Subject: Multicast Grouping
> > >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > I still don't understand why the below ACL can't be grouped:
> > > interface Loopback0
> > > ip pim sparse-dense-mode
> > > !
> > > ip pim send-rp-announce Loopback0 scope 16 group-list 50
> > > !
> > > access-list 50 permit 226.0.0.0 1.255.255.255
> > > access-list 50 permit 228.0.0.0 3.255.255.255
> > > access-list 50 permit 232.0.0.0 3.255.255.255
> > > access-list 50 permit 236.0.0.0 1.255.255.255
> > > access-list 50 permit 238.0.0.0 0.255.255.255
> > >
> > >
> > > Why can't we group them as:
> > > access-list 50 permit 226.0.0.0 12.255.255.255
> > >
> > > Thanks for the clarification,
> > >
> > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > Enter the Hunt & you could win a 2008 Eclipse Spyder! Click here to
> > enter!
> > > http://g.msn.ca/ca55/213
> > >
> > >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > > Subscription information may be found at:
> > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > _____
> >
> > Express yourself with free Messenger emoticons. Get them today!
> > <http://g.msn.ca/ca55/207>
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Apr 01 2008 - 07:53:55 ART