<?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 Re: VE's are resilient to ACLs - by design or it's a gigantic flaw? in Data Center (VDX)</title>
    <link>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/data-center-vdx/ve-s-are-resilient-to-acls-by-design-or-it-s-a-gigantic-flaw/m-p/61054#M246</link>
    <description>Hi Pawel, &lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
You need to use "hard-drop" instead of "deny" for the packets that go to the control plane/VDX own addresses. &lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
Many thanks,&lt;BR /&gt;
Sargis</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2019 02:14:08 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Sargis_Minasyan</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2019-02-01T02:14:08Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>VE's are resilient to ACLs - by design or it's a gigantic flaw?</title>
      <link>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/data-center-vdx/ve-s-are-resilient-to-acls-by-design-or-it-s-a-gigantic-flaw/m-p/61053#M245</link>
      <description>hi everyone,&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
On my vdx 6740 vcs fabric with NOS 7.3.0aa I'm trying to understand ACLs, I'm testing this one:&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;DIV class="threadCode"&gt;&lt;B&gt;code:&lt;/B&gt;&lt;PRE spellcheck="false"&gt;ip access-list deny_10-5-8-1 on Ve 4 at Ingress (From User)&lt;BR /&gt;    seq 10 permit ip host 10.5.8.49 host 10.5.8.81 (Active)&lt;BR /&gt;    seq 20 deny udp any host 10.5.8.254 (Active)&lt;BR /&gt;    seq 30 deny tcp any host 10.5.8.254 (Active)&lt;BR /&gt;    seq 40 deny ip any host 10.5.8.254 (Active)&lt;BR /&gt;    seq 50 deny ip any host 10.5.8.81 (Active)&lt;BR /&gt;    seq 60 permit ip any any (Active)&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
VE's runs with 10.5.8.254 and all the hosts/nodes connected to VCS fabric can get to this IP, no problems.&lt;BR /&gt;
Traffic to 10.5.8.81 gets denied, as expected.&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
Why traffic to VE's 10.5.8.254 is not denied???&lt;BR /&gt;
Many thanks.</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2019 02:12:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/data-center-vdx/ve-s-are-resilient-to-acls-by-design-or-it-s-a-gigantic-flaw/m-p/61053#M245</guid>
      <dc:creator>Pawel_Eljasz</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-02-01T02:12:08Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: VE's are resilient to ACLs - by design or it's a gigantic flaw?</title>
      <link>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/data-center-vdx/ve-s-are-resilient-to-acls-by-design-or-it-s-a-gigantic-flaw/m-p/61054#M246</link>
      <description>Hi Pawel, &lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
You need to use "hard-drop" instead of "deny" for the packets that go to the control plane/VDX own addresses. &lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
Many thanks,&lt;BR /&gt;
Sargis</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2019 02:14:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/data-center-vdx/ve-s-are-resilient-to-acls-by-design-or-it-s-a-gigantic-flaw/m-p/61054#M246</guid>
      <dc:creator>Sargis_Minasyan</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-02-01T02:14:08Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: VE's are resilient to ACLs - by design or it's a gigantic flaw?</title>
      <link>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/data-center-vdx/ve-s-are-resilient-to-acls-by-design-or-it-s-a-gigantic-flaw/m-p/61055#M247</link>
      <description>simplify  &amp;amp; many thanks.</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2019 00:15:47 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/data-center-vdx/ve-s-are-resilient-to-acls-by-design-or-it-s-a-gigantic-flaw/m-p/61055#M247</guid>
      <dc:creator>Pawel_Eljasz</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-02-02T00:15:47Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: VE's are resilient to ACLs - by design or it's a gigantic flaw?</title>
      <link>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/data-center-vdx/ve-s-are-resilient-to-acls-by-design-or-it-s-a-gigantic-flaw/m-p/61056#M248</link>
      <description>But out curiosity - what is the rationale behind this logic? &lt;BR /&gt;
Why not the same nomenclature for all?</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2019 00:16:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/data-center-vdx/ve-s-are-resilient-to-acls-by-design-or-it-s-a-gigantic-flaw/m-p/61056#M248</guid>
      <dc:creator>Pawel_Eljasz</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-02-02T00:16:58Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: VE's are resilient to ACLs - by design or it's a gigantic flaw?</title>
      <link>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/data-center-vdx/ve-s-are-resilient-to-acls-by-design-or-it-s-a-gigantic-flaw/m-p/61057#M249</link>
      <description>I don't really know, possibly different ways of programming the ASICs with hard-drop telling it not to trap the packets to CPU.</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2019 00:23:39 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/data-center-vdx/ve-s-are-resilient-to-acls-by-design-or-it-s-a-gigantic-flaw/m-p/61057#M249</guid>
      <dc:creator>Sargis_Minasyan</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-02-02T00:23:39Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

