A network administrator configures an IPv4 extended named Access Control List (ACL) on router R1 to control access to a server farm located on subnet 10.120.16.0/20, which connects locally to interface GigabitEthernet0/0. The policy requirements state that:
1. Management traffic (SSH and HTTPS) from 192.168.100.0/24 to the server farm must be allowed.
2. ICMP echo requests from host 192.168.200.5 to the server farm must be allowed.
3. All traffic originating inside the server farm (10.120.16.0/20) bound for its default gateway (10.120.16.1) must be allowed.
4. All other IPv4 traffic entering the server farm interface must be denied and logged.
The engineer applies the following configuration:
text
ip access-list extended SEC_SERVER_MGMT
permit tcp 192.168.100.0 0.0.0.255 10.120.16.0 0.0.15.255 eq 22
permit tcp 192.168.100.0 0.0.0.255 10.120.16.0 0.0.15.255 eq 443
permit icmp host 192.168.200.5 10.120.16.0 0.0.15.255 echo
permit ip 10.120.16.0 0.0.15.255 host 10.120.16.1
!
interface GigabitEthernet0/0
ip access-group SEC_SERVER_MGMT in
Which two statements correctly identify flaws or operational outcomes of this ACL deployment?
- Unlisted denied traffic will be dropped silently without generating log messages because no explicit deny statement with the log keyword was configured.Answer
- Traffic sent from the remote admin network (192.168.100.0/24) to the server farm will not match the ACL entries on GigabitEthernet0/0 because it enters R1 through a different interface.Answer
- CUnlisted IPv4 traffic will automatically trigger Syslog logging upon being dropped by the default implicit ACL processing engine.
- DThe wildcard mask 0.0.15.255 incorrectly matches hosts across the range 10.120.0.0 through 10.120.255.255 instead of the 10.120.16.0/20 subnet.