Hi there,
I'm trying to verify only two commands for cisco IOS ACL Extendend.
They are:
access-list 101 deny any 192.168.0.0/23 any
access-list 101 permit udp 192.168.1.1 any
For this i`m using a syntax checker avaliable on the internet located in http://techie.devnull.cz/aclcheck
But when i execute the software for checking, it gives me a error in line 1 saying "destination specification ?". I've read many guides for ACL syntax on the internet but i simply don`t get it, i just cant find this error. The destination is specified in the any keyword.
Is there errors in those commands? Or maybe a more reliable way to validate cisco IOS commands?
Regards
Edit: new commands are
access-list 101 deny ip 192.168.0.0/23 any
access-list 101 permit udp host 192.168.1.1 any
Same error.
Notice i've maintained the /23 notation on purpose, check the comments. Will try out with your guys suggestion but if that is the right notation it will break my translators work hehe
-
access-list 101 deny ip any 192.168.0.0 0.0.1.255 any
access-list 101 permit udp host 192.168.1.1 anyYou had a few problems in here. FIrst, you have to specify a protocol, even if that protocol is just IP. Second problem, you have to use wildcard masks to specify your subnet. Third problem, you must designate either a wildcard mask, any, or preface the host ip address with the word host. Hope this helps.
I'm not sure about a syntax checker. I just wear out the ? key on my keyboard.
From Jason Berg -
In your first line the error comes from
- /23, you can't write this ACL like that, you should use wildcard mask
- any after deny, this is the protocol field, any is not valid
In the second line, host is missing before the IP address
Right syntax is :
access-list 101 deny ip 192.168.0.0 0.0.1.255 any access-list 101 permit udp host 192.168.1.1 any
I will recommend you to use named access-list if possible, writing ACL as you did is a bit old school, harder to manage and more sensitive to errors. A better way to do this is :
ip access-list extended SOMETHING deny ip 192.168.0.0 0.0.1.255 any permit udp host 192.168.1.1 any
jaderanderson : ok, the host missing i`ve already fixed but the /23 should work. check http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/secursw/ps1018/products_tech_note09186a00800a5b9a.shtml#topic2 i`ve changed the any to ip too. will redo the syntax check againjaderanderson : Just to clarify, the 101 and 102 notation i`m using only because its standard input output ACL's. Right now i have no intention on testing them on a true cisco but i need to know if they will work. I`ve designed a web app that translates commands for different firewalls and stuff. Thanks for the helpZypher : @jader you might not be at the right IOS rev to get the use of the 'slash' notationjaderanderson : hummmm... maybe its right zypher. Can you tell me when slash notation was accepted? The aclcheck program was last updated in 2005, with the mask as suggested the program works fineradius : @jaderanderson nothing in the URL you provide tells that /X should work, it only tells that it can be *represented* like that but not that you can use this represention in an ACL. As far as I know the /X representation on IOS is only supported for prefix-list.jaderanderson : Well, guess you`re right radius. I'll have to implement a reverse mask by myself then since the 0.0.1.255 worked on aclcheckFrom radius