A network administrator configures an IPv4 extended numbered Access Control List (ACL 110) on a Cisco IOS router interface to prevent web traffic on TCP port 80 from reaching an internal web server at 192.168.10.50/32. The administrator enters the following single configuration command:
`R1(config)# access-list 110 deny tcp 10.1.1.0 0.0.0.255 host 192.168.10.50 eq 80`
ACL 110 is then applied inbound on the GigabitEthernet0/0 interface serving subnet 10.1.1.0/24. Immediately after applying the ACL, users on the 10.1.1.0/24 network report that all network communication is blocked, including ICMP pings, SSH access, and traffic destined for other subnets. Which configuration oversight is causing all traffic from subnet 10.1.1.0/24 to be dropped?
- The ACL lacks an explicit permit statement, causing all unlisted IPv4 traffic to be dropped by the default implicit deny any clause at the end of the list.Cevap
- BThe router processes forwarding decisions using longest prefix match prior to ACL evaluation, which overrides the single deny statement for non-matching destinations.
- CThe extended access-list configuration omitted the overload keyword necessary to maintain stateful translations for multi-host subnets.
- DA floating static route configured on GigabitEthernet0/0 takes precedence over ACL rules due to its lower administrative distance.
Cevap
The ACL lacks an explicit permit statement, causing all unlisted IPv4 traffic to be dropped by the default implicit deny any clause at the end of the list.
Every standard and extended Cisco IPv4 ACL concludes with an unwritten, invisible implicit deny clause ('deny ip any any'). When an ACL contains only a deny statement, any traffic that does not meet the specific deny criteria drops through to the implicit deny clause and is blocked. To fix this, a network administrator must configure a subsequent permit statement (such as 'access-list 110 permit ip any any') to allow all other traffic to pass through.
Adım Adım Çözüm
Anahtar Kavram
Implicit Deny Any Clause in IPv4 ACLs