From: Price, Jamie (jprice@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Wed Oct 18 2000 - 14:57:25 GMT-3
Title: RE: Summarization
What in the CCIE lab IS practical though? Reading the lab questions
its obvious that there are better ways to do things but that is not
the point of the exercise. The point is to take the scenarios that
they have mutated with restrictions and successfully complete them as
required.
Things like this access list issue are practical study materials for
the lab.
Jamie
-----Original Message-----
From: mark salmon [mailto:masalmon@cisco.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2000 1:57 PM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: Summarization
This may be self evident but I suspect that it s highly unlikely that
you will have so many Class B addresses under you own domain unless
you
are a huge ISP. The average (or even large) company will not have
that
many so a summary address like that may not be practical.
My .02
Justin Menga wrote:
>
> This would cover from 160.0.0.0 thru to 175.255.255.255
>
> You could also use 160.0.0.0 11.255.255.255 - this would summarize
160.x.x.x
> -> 163.x.x.x and 170.x.x.x -> 173.x.x.x.........
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Derek Buelna [mailto:dameon@aracnet.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2000 7:13 PM
> To: 'Marc Russell'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Summarization
>
> Hi,
>
> I was trying to figure out how to summarize 160.10.10.1/24,
161.10.10.1/24
> and 170.10.10.1/24 into one route.
>
> If I use the prefix 160.0.0.0 and mask it with 15.255.255.255, I was
> thinking that it would care about the first 4 bits and not care
about the
> rest. Would that cover 160.0.0.0 through 175.254.254.254?
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Derek
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:25:27 GMT-3