[j-nsp] Why is this term working?

[Doug Hanks]

Action modifiers such as count, loss-priority, and forwarding-class
implicitly imply a terminating action of accept.

Thank you,

-- 
Doug Hanks - JNCIE-ENT #213,  JNCIE-SP #875
Solutions Architect ­ EABU
Juniper Networks


On 7/22/12 10:34 AM, "John Neiberger" <jneiberger at gmail.com> wrote:

>Forgive my Juniper noobiness once again. We have the following term in
>a ingress firewall filter for marking:
>
>term netmgmt {
>    then {
>        count fec-cs2;
>        loss-priority high;
>        forwarding-class MNGMT;
>
>It seems to be working, but I don't know why. If there is no "accept",
>shouldn't it be dropping the traffic? I know the default action is
>accept, but once we use a "then" statement, don't we have to specify
>the accept/reject/discard action? I'm wondering if the
>"forwarding-class" statement has an implied accept or something like
>that. I really have no idea.
>
>Thanks,
>John
>_______________________________________________
>juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
>https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp