On Thursday 21 April 2011 06:55:41 Mick wrote: > On Wednesday 20 April 2011 16:56:15 Harry Putnam wrote: > > Mick <michaelkintz...@gmail.com> writes: > > > Do you get the same condensed format when you capture the logs in your > > > LAN syslog server? > > > > I did not try that, but is there some reason to expect a difference? > > No, it shouldn't - after all it is the same log file that you are > accessing, but wasn't sure if the gui condensed what's reported to fit it > in the screen. > > > I have channeled logs to Syslog running on gentoo with at least 2 > > different routers in the past and saw no difference in the logs. > > > > Do you notice a difference? > > I do not have a Cisco router to try it just now, but could you have a look > at how your access lists are defined? Extended ACLs *should* show ports, > as long as ports are used in permit/deny statements and asked to be > logged; e.g. > > access-list 102 permit tcp host 10.10.10.2 eq 0 any eq 0 log > > of course IOS versions may change things, but that's how I remember it > worked.
Ah! Here's what I found: http://blog.ioshints.info/2007/06/port-number-not-shown-in-access-list.html -- Regards, Mick
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
