Mark Tinka wrote: > On Friday 18 April 2008, Lincoln Dale wrote: > > >> obviously the recommendation would ba NAMED ACL every >> time. >> > > Except for where you can't use them, e.g., NTP access > groups. > right - however things like NTP access groups are clearly a control-plane (software-based) function anyway so there isn't any real downside or implication for programming TCAMs in that case. > But yes, we prefer named access lists as well, if not for > anything else than their manageability, and use them > wherever they are supported. >
an "enhancement" we used for NX-OS is that there is no such thing as a standard ACL, extended ACL, numbered ACL, named ACL - everything is a named ACL including what you'd have for NTP. for legacy reasons, such a change would be hard to retrofit to IOS, but i bet many folks wish that ACLs had simply been made 'named' initially way-back-when & then there wouldn't be all these variants & permutations that exist today. cheers, lincoln. _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
