Redundant prefix-list?

[Amafsha1]

Sorry for the dumb question, but is this prefix-list just allowing everything at the end?  so there is no point in specifying subnets before the last statment?

ip prefix-list eigrp-to-bgp seq 100 permit 0.0.0.0/0
ip prefix-list eigrp-to-bgp seq 120 permit 10.60.225.0/24
ip prefix-list eigrp-to-bgp seq 140 permit 10.124.10.0/24
ip prefix-list eigrp-to-bgp seq 240 permit 172.28.250.0/24
ip prefix-list eigrp-to-bgp seq 310 permit 192.168.12.0/24
ip prefix-list eigrp-to-bgp seq 320 permit 0.0.0.0/0 le 32

!

route-map eigrp-to-bgp permit 100
match ip address prefix-list eigrp-to-bgp

!

[Georg Pauwen · Accepted solution]

Hello,

indeed, 0.0.0.0/0 le 32 would allow all routes...making all your previous lines obsolete...

[Rafael Carvallo · Accepted solution]

Hi,

Indeed 

ip prefix-list eigrp-to-bgp seq 320 permit 0.0.0.0/0 le 32

is basically permitting all, basically this last rule reads as:

"permit anything from  0.0.0.0/0 (basically all ips) with a mask from 0 to less or equal than 32 (all possible subnets)"

If you want to avoid other subnets not explicitly added to the prefix-list, change the permit statement to a deny one. 

There are no dumb questions btw! it's better to always ask when unsure 

[Amafsha1]

Thank you very much.  So than what is the first line saying?

ip prefix-list eigrp-to-bgp seq 100 permit 0.0.0.0/0

[Rafael Carvallo]

Hi, this one is only permitting the default route, since you didn't add the "le or ge" words, basically reads as:

Permit Route 0.0.0.0 with mask 0.0.0.0 exactly

Thus allowing only this specific prefix.