[c-nsp] distribute list for eigrp

[Tony Varriale]

Sure do!  If you try to enter both, you will probably only get one entry in 
the ACL since they are one in the same.

Also, if you enter either of those in, your ACL will probably look like this 
in the config: access-list 55 deny 0.0.0.0
A host mask is assumed when there is no mask with standard ACLs.

The actual value of using an extended ACL for route redistribution/route 
filtering is for sequence numbers...makes it much easier to put in and pull 
out entries without modifying the whole ACL.

tv
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "james edwards" <lists.james.edwards at gmail.com>
To: <cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>
Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2006 4:43 PM
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] distribute list for eigrp


> On 11/9/06, Tony Varriale <tvarriale at comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> So does a standard ACL.  There is no benefit in using an extended ACL 
>> with
>> a
>> destination address..
>
>
>
> So both of these match the default route ?
>
> access-list 55 deny 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0
> access-list 55 deny host 0.0.0.0
>
> james
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/