Hi,
I reckon it's A
because the 172.16.1.1 address is not included in your access-list
statement.
the addresses that would be affected are 172.16.16.0/20 to 172.16.32.0/20
and 172.16.1.1/20 is in another network
R,
MariaD
""lishengtao"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
925adn$8lo$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:925adn$8lo$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> The following is an access-list entered on a Cisco router: access-list 135
> deny tcp 172.16.16.0 0.0.15.255 172.16.32.0 0.0.15.255 eq telnet
access-list
> 135 permit ip any any br>Which of the following would not apply if this
> access-list is used to control incoming packets on ethernet 0?
>
> A. address 172.16.1.1 will be denied telnet access to address 172.16.37.5
>
> B. address 172.16.16.1 will be permitted telnet access to address
> 172.16.32.1
>
> C. address 172.16.16.1 will be permitted telnet access to address
> 172.16.50.1
>
> D. address 172.16.30.12 will be permitted telnet access to address
> 172.16.32.12
>
>
> _________________________________
> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
_________________________________
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
