Security Basics mailing list archives
Re: Cisco Workaround
From: jamesworld () intelligencia com
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 10:48:27 -0500
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 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current thread:
- Re: Cisco Workaround jamesworld (Jul 23)
- RE: Cisco Workaround Ghaith Nasrawi (Jul 25)
- RE: Cisco Workaround (comment on actually using those protocols) jamesworld (Jul 28)
- RE: Cisco Workaround David Gillett (Jul 28)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: Cisco Workaround Naman Latif (Jul 23)
- RE: Cisco Workaround Todd Mitchell - lists (Jul 23)
- RE: Cisco Workaround Charlie Winckless (Jul 23)
- Re: Cisco Workaround DOUGLAS GULLETT (Jul 23)
- RE: Cisco Workaround Terry Baranski (Jul 24)
- Re: Cisco Workaround Paul Kincaid (Jul 24)
- RE: Cisco Workaround Dave Gilmore (Intrusense) (Jul 24)
(Thread continues...)
- RE: Cisco Workaround Ghaith Nasrawi (Jul 25)