<?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 Stack port acl and spanning tree in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/stack-port-acl-and-spanning-tree/m-p/1800178#M496531</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;I have a pair of 3750-x switches stacked together. Using spanning tree with our upstream provider I have an active line in port GigE 1/0/25 and a blocked redundant line in GigE 2/0/25. I have setup a port based acl as below on 1/0/25 which is a port on the current master switch. Do I need to manually set this on 2/025 as well? Just wondering what would happen if the line to the master switch was to disappear or if the master disappeared completely whether the acl would automatically be applied to 2/0/25. Thanks&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;interface GigabitEthernet1/0/25&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; ip access-group Main in&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2019 21:33:43 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>bravenet12</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2019-03-11T21:33:43Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Stack port acl and spanning tree</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/stack-port-acl-and-spanning-tree/m-p/1800178#M496531</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I have a pair of 3750-x switches stacked together. Using spanning tree with our upstream provider I have an active line in port GigE 1/0/25 and a blocked redundant line in GigE 2/0/25. I have setup a port based acl as below on 1/0/25 which is a port on the current master switch. Do I need to manually set this on 2/025 as well? Just wondering what would happen if the line to the master switch was to disappear or if the master disappeared completely whether the acl would automatically be applied to 2/0/25. Thanks&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;interface GigabitEthernet1/0/25&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; ip access-group Main in&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2019 21:33:43 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/stack-port-acl-and-spanning-tree/m-p/1800178#M496531</guid>
      <dc:creator>bravenet12</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-11T21:33:43Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Stack port acl and spanning tree</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/stack-port-acl-and-spanning-tree/m-p/1800179#M496533</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Graham &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;You should apply it to the gi2/0/25 port connection as well because certainly if the line went down it would not automatically propogate this to the other port. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;So yes apply it both.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Jon&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Oct 2011 18:55:33 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/stack-port-acl-and-spanning-tree/m-p/1800179#M496533</guid>
      <dc:creator>Jon Marshall</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-10-04T18:55:33Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Stack port acl and spanning tree</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/stack-port-acl-and-spanning-tree/m-p/1800180#M496534</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks Jon - verifed in our testing. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 Oct 2011 23:54:49 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/stack-port-acl-and-spanning-tree/m-p/1800180#M496534</guid>
      <dc:creator>bravenet12</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-10-06T23:54:49Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

