Standard vs. Extended ACLs (router load)

From: Jakub Pastucha (jakub.pastucha@inetia.pl)
Date: Tue Nov 27 2001 - 10:05:43 EST

Next message: Gyorfy, Shawn: "[nsp] IOS 12.2 Mainline IOS's"
Previous message: Sean Crocker: "Re: [nsp] [NSP] 3620 memory errors"
Next in thread: Jakub Pastucha: "Standard vs. Extended ACLs (router load)"
Maybe reply: Jakub Pastucha: "Standard vs. Extended ACLs (router load)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

Hi All,
I would appreciate any comments on router load caused by ACL application.
Does it matter to router which ACL is applied - Standard or Extended?
Is any difference in stress put on router by:
access-list 1 permit 1.1.1.1
access-list 1 deny any

or this:
ip access-list extended 101
permit ip any 1.1.1.1
deny any any

TIA,
Kuba Pastucha
Netia Telekom S.A.

Next message: Gyorfy, Shawn: "[nsp] IOS 12.2 Mainline IOS's"
Previous message: Sean Crocker: "Re: [nsp] [NSP] 3620 memory errors"
Next in thread: Jakub Pastucha: "Standard vs. Extended ACLs (router load)"
Maybe reply: Jakub Pastucha: "Standard vs. Extended ACLs (router load)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Aug 04 2002 - 04:12:55 EDT