I dunno how you want to implement this; but as far as I know, the way most people generally do policy routing on cisco thru routemap is they define the source IP's via access-list... Does that make a huge difference than regular access lists? I dunno... Well yes, It seems that an IP deny is more process intensive than an IP
Which Cisco router ? IOS ? HW/SW/CEF/netflow/<whatver> "IP switching" ? While I have had this problem on different routers the ones I constantly have it on are Cisco Cat 5000s with RSMs(RSP4). I have tried different codes, I am currently at 12.04. But it's not a code issue. It's just a
At 09:21 AM 3/25/2003 -0500, Haesu wrote: permit. I do not claim to know why. I have just seen it myself. Anyway depending on the attack with large numbers of packets sometimes the CPU is so high you can get knocked off the router. I wanted to see if policy routing is less taxing on the router. With the access-list for a policy route map you have a access-list permit, so I figured it might be less taxing. limitation of the router. I just need something less taxing on the router. I just need to know if anyone has already done this.