From: Foster, Kristopher (KFoster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Wed Oct 25 2000 - 13:41:46 GMT-3
Sorry, I should have been more clear. The no sync command is viewed in the
same light as static routes (it takes half the fun out! :D). This tidbit
came from one of the ccie netgun technical experts at global knowledge. So
basically don't get into the bad habit of slapping in the no sync command
everytime you get stuck.
Kris,
-----Original Message-----
From: mark salmon [mailto:masalmon@cisco.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2000 2:00 PM
To: 'ccielab@groupstudy.com'
Subject: Re: Loosing marks for extra commands
I suspect that you are speaking from personal experience, but I am
surprised that if the lab does not explicitly forbids a command, that
using it will cost you points.
"Foster, Kristopher" wrote:
>
> If you use 'no synchronization' in your BGP config's you will not get the
> marks.
>
> Kris,
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: McNutt, Steve [mailto:Steve.McNutt@ahlcorp.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2000 9:57 AM
> To: 'Shaun Nicholson'; ccielab
> Subject: RE: Loosing marks for extra commands
>
> I'm dying to know too, because there are some things I do as a matter of
> habit that may or may not be needed in some situations, but they save time
> by freeing me up to concentrate on other things. some examples:
>
> using frame maps for for everything and not depending on inverse-arp.
> turning off auto-summary on routing protocols (i'll tell you when to
> summarize!! hehe)
> unless a specific requirement I usually turn off synchronization for BGP.
> if the practice scenario gives me some wiggle room on statics (like only
> specifying that I can't create a default route) I create null routes for
> summary addresses.
>
> I can do without these things, but it really speeds setup and
> troubleshooting because I've eliminated some problematic features up
front.
>
> Of course I'm also the Ethernet Nazi at work and I will turn off any port
> that has an unlabled cable, no port description, or is set to
autonegotiate.
> Better for it to not work at all than to have people coming to me with
crazy
> problems all the time.
>
> -steve
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shaun Nicholson [mailto:Shaun.Nicholson@kp.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2000 8:44 AM
> To: ccielab
> Subject: Loosing marks for extra commands
>
> This may be a NDA violation but I read here on this group a few weeks ago
> that you can loose marks for using extra unnessesary commands that were
not
> needed. I dont know if this is true or not can anyone shed some light on
> this statement.
>
> For example I like to remove any chance of frame relay inverse arp working
> so I use the no frame-relay inverse-arp command and then do frame maps
from
> my hub router to all my spokes and then my spokes to my hub and then to
the
> spokes. Would this be considered extra commands? is this something the
> proctor could answer on the day if its an NDA issue?
>
> Anyone able to help? Please dont shoot yourself in the foot if it is and
NDA
> issue just dont answer.
>
> Shaun
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:25:30 GMT-3