Re: prefix-list acl equivalency

From: Igor M. (imanassypov@rogers.com)
Date: Wed Sep 24 2008 - 22:34:26 ART

yes, none of the two acls below work...

----------------------

I.M., M.Eng. P.Eng.

Network Architect

CI Investments

----------------------

--- On Wed, 9/24/08, Fahad Khan <fahad.khan@gmail.com> wrote:
From: Fahad Khan <fahad.khan@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: prefix-list acl equivalency
To: "Igor M." <imanassypov@rogers.com>
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com, "Joseph Brunner" <joe@affirmedsystems.com>
Received: Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 5:33 PM

Plz let me know, have you tried both of them ??? do they work for you???

regards,

On 9/24/08, Igor M. <imanassypov@rogers.com> wrote:
>
> Thats what I thought, however it does not cut it...
> Below is the list of my networks. As you notice, there is one /29 specific
> in
> there. I need to come up with an ACL that would only leak that route...
> access-list 101 permit ip 178.2.8.248 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.248 0.0.0.0
>
> or
>
> access-list 101 permit ip 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 255.255.255.248 0.0.0.0
>
> dont pass anything
> D EX 178.2.8.248/29 [170/409600] via 150.100.3.254, 00:00:26,
> Ethernet0/1
> D EX 178.2.1.0/24 [170/409600] via 150.100.3.254, 00:00:26, Ethernet0/1
> D EX 178.2.2.0/24 [170/409600] via 150.100.3.254, 00:00:26, Ethernet0/1
> D EX 178.2.3.0/24 [170/409600] via 150.100.3.254, 00:00:26, Ethernet0/1
> D EX 178.2.4.0/24 [170/409600] via 150.100.3.254, 00:00:26, Ethernet0/1
> D EX 178.2.5.0/24 [170/409600] via 150.100.3.254, 00:00:26, Ethernet0/1
> D EX 178.2.6.0/24 [170/409600] via 150.100.3.254, 00:00:26, Ethernet0/1
> D EX 178.2.7.0/24 [170/409600] via 150.100.3.254, 00:00:26, Ethernet0/1
> D EX 178.2.9.0/24 [170/409600] via 150.100.3.254, 00:00:26, Ethernet0/1
> D EX 178.2.10.0/24 [170/409600] via 150.100.3.254, 00:00:26,
> Ethernet0/1
>
>
>
> ----------------------
>
> I.M., M.Eng. P.Eng.
>
> Network Architect
>
> CI Investments
>
> ----------------------
>
> --- On Wed, 9/24/08, Joseph Brunner <joe@affirmedsystems.com> wrote:
> From: Joseph Brunner <joe@affirmedsystems.com>
> Subject: RE: prefix-list acl equivalency
> To: "'Igor M.'" <imanassypov@rogers.com>,
ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Received: Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 12:24 PM
>
> Wouldn't it be
>
> access-list 101 permit ip 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 255.255.255.248 0.0.0.0
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> Igor
> M.
> Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2008 12:04 PM
> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: prefix-list acl equivalency
>
> Hello,
>
> What is the access-list equivalency to the following prefix list for
> distribution list purposes:
>
> ip prefix-list SUB29 seq 5 permit 0.0.0.0/0 ge 29 le 29
>
>
> Thanks!
>
> ----------------------
>
> I.M., M.Eng. P.Eng.
>
> Network Architect
>
> CI Investments
>
> ----------------------
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 

-- 
Fahad Khan

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Oct 04 2008 - 09:26:19 ART