From: keith tokash (ktokash@hotmail.com)
Date: Sun Jun 01 2008 - 01:09:21 ART
That depends on what you consider "significant". The IGMP acl will block
hosts from joining a group, while the IP acl will block packets to that IP
address (group). One works on IGMP, the other on IP. Whether that's
significant depends on whether you run up against some restriction that
prohibits you from using one, forcing you to use the other. I don't mean a
lab restriction like, where someone says, "Don't use an IP acl", I mean a real
one. Personally I can't think of one, but that doesn't mean it isn't out
there.
The information in this e-mail is intended for the
attention and use of the everyone in the world, or I wouldn't have sent it in
an unencrypted email. This message or any part thereof can and should be
disclosed, copied, distributed and retained by any person without
authorization from the addressee. Furthermore, I reserve the right to
disclose, copy, distribute and retain anything anyone sends *me* via email, up
to and including putting the exact text in a MySpace bulletin.
> Date: Sat, 31 May 2008 17:53:57 -0400
> From: lhall@setnine.com
> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: igmp vs ip access-group
>
> is there any significant difference between using
> ip igmp access-group <std acl> and blocking the same traffic
> using ip access-group <ext acl blocking igmp>? if theres
> not i dont see why they would even have the command
> 'ip igmp access-group' so I thought there must be something, i
> cant find anything and it would be nice to know definitively.
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Jul 01 2008 - 06:23:20 ART