Cisco Cisco, Please don't ever post on other peoples behalf if it includes me (Do us all a favour). You have not earned that right. I would never have someone like you representing me. I don't like a*se licking, so I'm not going to do that for Howard, but equally, I don't like smart a*ses. Seems that your low esteem provokes you to attack others without cause.
Consider the following reply: "I believe that Cisco does allow access-list remarks now" Doesn't that seem friendlier. Are you this aggressive face to face or is this as I suspect, small man syndrome at it's best? See you at the lab one day, or at a job interview perhaps. Gaz ""Cisco Cisco"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Howard, > If you actually worked on a router in the real world > rather than just tell people you do, you would know > that Cisco has supported access-list remarks for some > time now. > > Oh I'm sure you're going to reply to this e-mail with > some stupid story like, "This reminds me when I was > talking to a developer at Apple about Mac OS 1.0 but I > had never really worked on an Apple" or some worthless > story like that. > > Also do us all a favor and quit cross posting from > other mailing list. We don't want to see your replies > to the juniper and ccie mailing list posts. Cross > posting can be dangerous when you're on some of the > list the you are on.... wink, wink ;-) > > > ""Howard C. Berkowitz"" wrote: > > > >Yes, it does make simple tasks a little more > complicated. However, using > > >inverse masking can make complex tasks much easier. > > > > > >Take this issue. Say you are asked to filter access > to all odd 192.168.x.0 > > >/24 routes. > > > > > > > > >Your method. > > > > > >192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0 > > >192.168.3.0 255.255.255.0 > > >192.168.5.0 255.255.255.0 > > >FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: > > > > > > I see your approach, Marc, and I have even > encountered real-world > > situations where such filtering might be > appropriate. It happened > > when an enterprise wanted to "leave room for > expansion", but didn't > > understand summarization. They assigned > odd-numbered subnets to > > different sites/areas, thinking the even ones would > be for future use. > > > > My approach, incidentally, is to figure out the > number of potential > > areas or sites, then divide by a power of 2, at > least 4, to be > > summarization-friendly. > > > > There's no question that your approach takes fewer > lines of code. > > Personally, I wouldn't use it except in a huge > network where there > > was no other way to fit that many lines into NVRAM. > > > > My motivation for not doing so is maintainability. > The more complex > > the mask, the more difficult it will be for some > subsequent > > administrator to figure out what was being done. I > might be more > > open to the idea if Cisco saved comments with the > configuration, but, > > of course, it doesn't. > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Send your FREE holiday greetings online! > http://greetings.yahoo.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=30500&t=30473 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
