<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic ACE ordering in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ace-ordering/m-p/2674873#M194333</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have a really long&amp;nbsp;access list that has the following 2 entries, in this order, contained in it:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;show ip access-list blah&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;lt;output omitted&amp;gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;1010 &amp;nbsp;deny ip any 192.168.1.128 0.0.0.63 log &amp;nbsp;(no matches)&lt;BR /&gt;1200 &amp;nbsp;permit tcp host 192.168.1.130 gt 1023 any eq www (matches actively incrementing at the rate of 2 or 3 every few seconds)&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;lt;output omitted&amp;gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;since the host 192.168.1.130 is contained within the subnet denied in the previous statement, I am at a loss to explain why the TCP traffic to the specific host is not ALSO denied by the previous line.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Anybody got a clue as to what might cause this? &amp;nbsp;What obvious thing am I missing? &amp;nbsp;I thought the hit counter only incremented if traffic was matched, and it really doesn't look like the tcp/80 traffic from 192.168.1.130 should be allowed.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;(1st 3 octets of the IP address were changed to private, but the mask and the last octet are the same)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Sue&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Mar 2019 06:10:54 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>sue.nall</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2019-03-12T06:10:54Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>ACE ordering</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ace-ordering/m-p/2674873#M194333</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have a really long&amp;nbsp;access list that has the following 2 entries, in this order, contained in it:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;show ip access-list blah&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;lt;output omitted&amp;gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;1010 &amp;nbsp;deny ip any 192.168.1.128 0.0.0.63 log &amp;nbsp;(no matches)&lt;BR /&gt;1200 &amp;nbsp;permit tcp host 192.168.1.130 gt 1023 any eq www (matches actively incrementing at the rate of 2 or 3 every few seconds)&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;lt;output omitted&amp;gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;since the host 192.168.1.130 is contained within the subnet denied in the previous statement, I am at a loss to explain why the TCP traffic to the specific host is not ALSO denied by the previous line.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Anybody got a clue as to what might cause this? &amp;nbsp;What obvious thing am I missing? &amp;nbsp;I thought the hit counter only incremented if traffic was matched, and it really doesn't look like the tcp/80 traffic from 192.168.1.130 should be allowed.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;(1st 3 octets of the IP address were changed to private, but the mask and the last octet are the same)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Sue&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Mar 2019 06:10:54 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ace-ordering/m-p/2674873#M194333</guid>
      <dc:creator>sue.nall</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-12T06:10:54Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Line 1010 is deny FROM any to</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ace-ordering/m-p/2674874#M194334</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Line 1010 is deny &lt;STRONG&gt;FROM&lt;/STRONG&gt;&amp;nbsp;any&amp;nbsp;to the subnet&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Line 1200 is permit from a host in the subnet &lt;STRONG&gt;TO&lt;/STRONG&gt; any&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Assuming it's on a stateful firewall, the reflexive ACL will allow the return traffic that is generated by traffic being allowed by line 1200.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Jun 2015 03:14:55 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ace-ordering/m-p/2674874#M194334</guid>
      <dc:creator>Marvin Rhoads</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-06-25T03:14:55Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Thanks Marvin, I can't</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ace-ordering/m-p/2674875#M194335</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Thanks Marvin, I can't believe I missed that! &amp;nbsp;I'm re structuring these massive ACLs on HSRP pairs of routers and I'm just going cross eyed looking at that. &amp;nbsp;Silly question, but I appreciate the response.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Sue&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Jun 2015 13:03:24 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ace-ordering/m-p/2674875#M194335</guid>
      <dc:creator>sue.nall</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-06-25T13:03:24Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

