132 Posts

January 4th, 2005 11:00

Where are you applying the ACL?  The rules will only be applicabe to ingress traffic.  If this ACL is bound to the interface that the laptop is connected to (physical or virtual), then your configuration should perform as expected. 

1 Rookie

 • 

13 Posts

January 4th, 2005 14:00

I apply the ACL to the port where the [dest ip] server is attached.   (Laptop and server are both attached to the 3324)

Message Edited by lucasnodine on 01-04-2005 10:30 AM

Message Edited by lucasnodine on 01-04-2005 10:31 AM

1 Rookie

 • 

13 Posts

January 4th, 2005 15:00

After further reviewing this issue, I noticed that if I create a rule series such as

deny any [source ip] 0.0.0.0 [dest. ip] 0.0.0.0

permit any any any

then put that on an ethernet port, it will not work; however, if I bind it to the VLAN (contains all ports) then it will work.  Perhaps it has something to do with being bound to a physical port on the switch?

132 Posts

January 4th, 2005 17:00

It would be expected you are able to communicate with your laptop, if the initial ACL is applied to the server interface.
Explanation ::
The ACL is only applied to traffic as it enters the interface the ACL is bound to.  For instance, provided your rules and the interface the ACL is bound to --
Your initial rule - permit any [server1 ip] 0.0.0.0 [dest ip] 0.0.0.0 - allows server1 to communicate with the specified address (dest ip). 
 
The second rule - permit any [server2 ip] 0.0.0.0 [dest ip] 0.0.0.0 - allows server2 to communicate with the specified address (dest ip).
 
The third rule - denies all other communication.
 
With this in mind, if the ACL is bound to the physical interface the server is attached to, then the ACL will not be applicable to the laptop interface.  If you were to apply this ACL to the VLAN, then only server1 and server2 would be able to communicate with the specified destination IP addresses, and no other communication would be permitted.
 
Considering your second ACL --
The initial rule - deny any [source ip] 0.0.0.0 [dest. ip] 0.0.0.0 - indicates to deny any traffic from a specific source to a specific destination.
 
The second rule - permit any any any - allows any and all other communication.
 
ACL Entries (ACEs) are applied utilizing the first rule, then continuing in sequential order.  Your statement denies traffic from [source ip] to [dest. ip], then allows all other communication.  If the ACL is bound to the [source ip] interface (physical or virtual) then it should perform as expected.  However, if the ACL is bound to the [dest. ip] interface (physical), then the results will not be as expected.
Explanation ::
As ACLs are applied to traffic as it physically enters the switch, you must consider the flow of traffic to correctly apply your ACLs and correctly enter the necessary ACEs.  If you apply your second ACL to the physical interface the [source ip] is attached to, your results should be as expected.  If the rule is applied to the interface the [dest. ip] is attached to, then your results may vary.  The reason is that if the ACL is bound to the [dest. ip] interface, then traffic that enters the interface will have a different (source) IP address than is specified in the ACL.  In this instance, the ACL will not be applied as there is not a match.  Thus, communication will be established as the rule - permit any any any - allows this communication. 
 
Applying the ACL to the VLAN is equivalent (in this case) to applying the ACL to the physical interface [source ip] is attached to. 

Message Edited by DELL-Randy on 01-04-2005 02:13 PM

1 Rookie

 • 

13 Posts

January 5th, 2005 17:00

Wow, Thank you.  That is the best answer I have ever had from any computer company related to a technical issue ever. 

 

Thank you!

12 Posts

March 31st, 2005 17:00

I am having problems with what appers to be a simple access list. I want to permit all traffic to from each host on the same subnet and then restrict all other traffic based on protocol.
 
The following access-list is applied to VLAN401 and each device is assigned to VLAN401
 
ip access-list 401ACL
permit ip 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.255 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.255
 
When I apply the ACL to the VLAN, all traffic is blocked between the hosts on the VLAN.
 
For instance 192.168.1.10 can no longer communicate with 192.168.1.11
 
What am I doing wrong?
 
 

12 Posts

March 31st, 2005 17:00

DOH! Sorry I am used to Cisco access-lists
 
This works
permit any 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.255 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.255
 
Thanks!
 
Do you ever feel like your talking to yourself?
No Events found!

Top