Hi Aaron, On 23.07.2012 3:16 PM, Aaron wrote: > Hi Tim, et al, why don't you have your bvi1 listed as a routed interface > within that bg:bd ? > > l2vpn > bridge group EDFA > bridge-domain EDFA > ? interface BVI1 ?
Sorry, copy and paste error. Of course, the bvi1 interface is also in the bridge-domain as "routed interface BVI1". l2vpn bridge group EDFA bridge-domain EDFA interface GigabitEthernet0/0/0/2 ! interface GigabitEthernet0/0/0/3 ! routed interface BVI1 ! ! ! > Also, have you tested real traffic via those foo-out egress acls on those l2 > interfaces? Yes, it works. (But we have this setup only for management networks, therefore I cannot say if there are strange caveats) > I tried that the other day on my gig0/0/0/1.10 and I don't > recall them working. Am I the only one that thinks it's strange to add > layer 3 packet filter acl's to a layer 2 transport/bridging interface? I think that is strange, too, but it works... -tim _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
