I have a familiar feeling that I'm going to be completely off on this one,
but hopefully the correct answer will be posted so I can figure out why.
As long as the correct "deny" statements are there, it seems to me that the
other "permit" statements would be redundant when used with the "permit all"
statement at the end.....
access-list 101 deny ip 172.22.30.0 0.0.0.255 192.168.18.27 0.0.0.0
access-list 101 deny ip 172.22.0.0 0.0.255.255 192.168.18.64 0.0.0.63
access-list 101 permit ip 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255
Looking forward to the answer,
- Jeremy Felt
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Fowler"
To:
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2001 2:05 PM
Subject: Access List problem. [7:12525]
> Someone sent me this and I just can't figure it out. I've been staring at
it
> and trying things since last week. Any ideas?
>
>
> Jeff Doyle says this access-list can be rewritten with 3 lines and still
> provide the same functionality. Let me know if you guys figure out:
>
> access-list 101 permit ip 172.22.30.6 0.0.0.0 10.0.0.0 0.255.255.255
> access-list 101 permit ip 172.22.30.95 0.0.0.0 10.11.12.0 0.0.0.255
> access-list 101 deny ip 172.22.30.0 0.0.0.255 192.168.18.27 0.0.0.0
> access-list 101 permit ip 172.22.0.0 0.0.31.255 192.168.18.0 0.0.0.255
> access-list 101 deny ip 172.22.0.0 0.0.255.255 192.168.18.64 0.0.0.63
> access-list 101 permit ip 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255
>
> Have fun...
>
>
> Thank You,
> Robert Fowler
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=12535&t=12525
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
