[Exhibit]

You need to apply a Layer 2 firewall filter on a Juniper Networks EX Series Switch to block traffic from the source MAC address 00:12:34:56:00:07 entering the switch on ge-0/0/3. After committing the configuration, traffic from the MAC address still passes through.
Referring to the exhibit, which statement is correct in this scenario?
The intent of this filter is to match and discard traffic from one single, specific host MAC address, which requires the source-mac-address match condition to reference the complete, exact 48-bit address using an explicit /48 mask (or no mask at all, which Junos treats as an implicit full match) so that only that one precise address is matched. As configured, the term instead specifies a /40 mask on 00:12:34:56:00:07, meaning only the first 40 bits (the first five octets, 00:12:34:56:00) are actually significant to the match, while the sixth octet is effectively wildcarded across its full range; this produces an imprecise, overly broad match criterion rather than the single-host match the administrator intended, and is a common configuration mistake that undermines the predictability and correctness of MAC-based filtering. The lesson tested here is that source and destination MAC address match conditions in Junos firewall filters must be specified with the correct, deliberate, and explicit prefix length appropriate to the intended scope --- typically /48 for a single exact host --- rather than an arbitrary or miscalculated mask value. Firewall filters under family ethernet-switching are fully capable of matching on both source-mac-address and destination-mac-address, which rules out that option entirely. Layer 2 MAC-based filters function correctly on both access and trunk interface modes, so interface type is not a limiting factor here. There is no indication in the exhibit that the filter's application direction (input versus output) is reversed. Reference topics: Junos Enterprise Switching -- Layer 2 Security, MAC Address Match Conditions and Prefix Length Precision.
Currently there are no comments in this discussion, be the first to comment!