RE: Cisco Workaround

[Ghaith Nasrawi <libero () aucegypt edu>]

Well, my question is; what the hell if I was using any of these
protocols?? Didn't cisco think of that?? They should have suggested a
more decent solution.


./Ghaith
===============

Today is the tomorrow you worried about yesterday





-----Original Message-----
From: jamesworld () intelligencia com [mailto:jamesworld () intelligencia com]

Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 6:48 PM
To: Alvaro Gordon-Escobar
Cc: firewalls () securityfocus com; security-basics () securityfocus com
Subject: Re: Cisco Workaround

Alvaro,

No.  The protocol blocked by the access-list is protocol 53 not protocol

TCP or protocol UDP port 53.

If you need further info, let me know,

-James



At 09:15 7/23/2003, Alvaro Gordon-Escobar wrote:
> will this access list modification prevent my internal DNS server from 
> updates to it self from my telco's DNS server?
>
> access-list 101 deny 53 any any
> access-list 101 deny 55 any any
> access-list 101 deny 77 any any
> access-list 101 deny 103 any any
> !--- insert any other previously applied ACL entries here
> !--- you must permit other protocols through to allow normal
> !--- traffic -- previously defined permit lists will work
> !--- or you may use the permit ip any any shown here
> access-list 101 permit ip any any
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> ~alvaro Escobar
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
----
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----


------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------