Access list

[chab8371]

Either way, all the change made was in the conviction that was in test mode and the confirmation would take place since putting the user and pass, otherwise the system comes back to the prior state. I am right?

[sirhc]

So the only thing I have not yet tested is when the switch is in another sub-net than my workstation meaning it is routed but so far all my testing leads me to believe you might have done something wrong or are not telling me all the information.

Could even be a fat fingered mistake, who knows at this point?

[sirhc]

Either way, all the change made was in the conviction that was in test mode and the confirmation would take place since putting the user and pass, otherwise the system comes back to the prior state. I am right?

Apparently the access list is not included in the Revert, I guess Eric's logic is that it warns you if your IP is not going to reach the switch? I will discuss this with him though for next release.

[chab8371]

That´s right! That was the advice I notice before applying. Nevertheless the IP consigned was the PC´s IP. I´m sure of that.

[sirhc]

Well if it was warning you about that then you should have stopped and thought about it BEFORE you hit Save/Apply as it was telling you that you would lose control.

Is your workstation behind a NAT router? If so then the IP address you put in the access list is NOT the IP of the computer but the IP address of your NAT router.

Also the ":100" was not to be put in the IP address just the IP address.

I am thinking this is something you did wrong or do not understand about routing and or NAT routing?

[chab8371]

You SHOULD include the revert in that case too!! You should imagine us like donkeys, not clever people

[sirhc]

You SHOULD include the revert in that case too!! You should imagine us like donkeys, not clever people

We may do that but the more we hold peoples hand the more it restricts people in what they so.....think APPLE

[chab8371]

No no no. I´m not stupid, Chris. NOT ROUTING IN THIS CASE. It´s a simple bridge.

[sirhc]

Come on thought the UI was telling you that you were about to make a bad mistake and you plowed ahead anyway?

[chab8371]

I don´t know why the UI was telling me that that IP will not have access. I have to admit that I had a second of doubt.

On the other hand, I believe that if you change the http port, the :port should be included. Otherwise the browser assumes that the IP that you want to access is through port 80.