Examine the following ACL rule policies:
✑ Permit traffic from 10.2.2.1 through 10.2.2.30 to anywhere
✑ Permit traffic from 10.2.2.40 through 10.2.2.55 to anywhere
✑ Deny all others
Based on this policy, place the following ACL rule statements in the correct order to accomplish the above filtering policy.
The correct order of ACL statements to accomplish the given filtering policy is: deny ip 10.2.2.31 255.255.255.255 any, permit ip 10.2.2.40 255.255.255.248 any, permit ip 10.2.2.48 255.255.255.248 any, deny ip 10.2.2.32 255.255.255.224 any, and permit ip 10.2.2.0 255.255.255.192 any. This configuration ensures that traffic from 10.2.2.1 through 10.2.2.30 is permitted, traffic from 10.2.2.40 through 10.2.2.55 is permitted, and all others are denied.
Correct answer is A
None of these are correct.
A is best fit because of where the deny 10.2.2.32/27 sits in the other options, this denies .33 to .62 so permit .40 to .55 needs to come before this statement. But I agree none are actually correct...
I agree its A however its a stupid way to do it.
deny ip 10.2.2.31 255.255.255.255 any --> Denies 10.2.2.31 permit ip 10.2.2.40 255.255.255.248 any --> Permits 10.2.2.40 - 10.2.2.47 permit ip 10.2.2.48 255.255.255.248 any --> Permits 10.2.2.48 - 10.2.2.55 deny ip 10.2.2.32 255.255.255.224 any --> Denies 10.2.2.32 - 10.2.2.63 but 40-55 perm. permit ip 10.2.2.0 255.255.255.192 any --> Permits 10.2.2.0 - 10.2.2.30
Nice oldschool question: Correct is A. deny ip 10.2.2.31 255.255.255.255 any (deny .31) permit ip 10.2.2.40 255.255.255.248 any (permit .40-47) permit ip 10.2.2.48 255.255.255.248 any (permit .48-55) deny ip 10.2.2.32 255.255.255.224 any (deny .32-63) #already permitted 40-55 permit ip 10.2.2.0 255.255.255.192 any (permit .0-63) #already denied 32-39 from above ACE # implicit deny any any result: permitted .1-30 and .40-55 and denied any