From: Joe (groupstudy@comcast.net)
Date: Sat Jan 04 2003 - 00:17:52 GMT-3
They won't be able to go to 12.2 until all the labs can support it, i.e.
they have replaced all 2500s with 2600s. Once that is done, you can bet
you'll see 12.2 regardless of whether it is GD or not.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Chuck Church
Sent: Friday, January 03, 2003 1:03 PM
To: Matthew Poole; cebuano; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: IOS lab version - Was: Clarification needed on BGP and MEDs
Matt,
Yes, it's still 12.1. BUT, 12.2 is probably within 5 months of
becoming GD. So the lab would soon follow that, I'd imagine. If I was
planning to take my lab towards October or so of this year, it might not
be a bad idea to know some 12.2 features now. Looking at CCO, 12.1
became GD at 12.1.13 in Feb 2002. But it was on the lab in Nov
2001.....
Chuck Church
CCIE #8776, MCNE, MCSE
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matthew Poole" <matthew.poole@blueyonder.co.uk>
To: "cebuano" <cebu2ccie@cox.net>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Friday, January 03, 2003 11:29 AM
Subject: OT:Re: Clarification needed on BGP and MEDs
> I thought the lab only tested on features up to 12.1?
>
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/learning/le3/le2/le23/le7/learning_ce
rtif
> ication_type_home.html#42
>
> This is the 2nd post today referring to 12.2, a little worrying ;-).
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "cebuano" <cebu2ccie@cox.net>
> To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Friday, January 03, 2003 3:04 PM
> Subject: RE: Clarification needed on BGP and MEDs
>
>
> > Well, if you haven't noticed yet, the Parkhurst book you are
> > referring to has MANY, MANY technical info NOT included, specially
> > since it was written pre-12.2 and does not present the topic from an
> > ISSUES perspective but simply to test the different commands. Don't
> > forget to also check its errata on Ciscopress because I've exchanged
> > e-mails with the author to confirm the errors I found both in this
> > book and the OSPF command reference book as well.
> >
> > Regards.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
> > Of Jennifer Bellucci
> > Sent: Friday, January 03, 2003 1:38 AM
> > To: cebuano; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: Re: Clarification needed on BGP and MEDs
> >
> > get hold of BGP config and command handbook from ciscopress. Did
> > wonders for me, after that flick through halabi and JD 2, those
> > books are good for the
> > concepts and stuff but the book above gives you what I wanted, to
find
> > out
> > what all the commands actually do, plus reading the command guide
can
> > sometimes damage your mental stability.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "cebuano" <cebu2ccie@cox.net>
> > To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > Sent: Friday, January 03, 2003 5:46 AM
> > Subject: Clarification needed on BGP and MEDs
> >
> >
> > > Hi group.
> > > I need to clarify my reading of this CCO page.
> > >
> > > The following examples demonstrate how the bgp deterministic med
> > > and
> > bgp
> > > always-compare-med commands can influence MED-based path
> > > selection.
> > > Note: Cisco Systems recommends enabling the bgp deterministic med
> > > command in all new network rollouts. For existing networks, the
> > command
> > > must either be deployed on all routers at the same time, or
> > > incrementally, with care to avoid possible internal BGP (iBGP)
> > > routing loops. For example, consider the following routes for
> > > network 10.0.0.0/8:
> > > entry1: AS(PATH) 500, med 150, external, rid 172.16.13.1
> > > entry2: AS(PATH) 100, med 200, external, rid 1.1.1.1
> > > entry3: AS(PATH) 500, med 100, internal, rid 172.16.8.4 The order
> > > in which the BGP routes were received is entry3, entry2, and
> > > entry1 (entry3 is the oldest entry in the BGP table and entry1 is
> > > the newest one).
> > > Note: When BGP receives multiple routes to a particular
> > > destination,
> > it
> > > lists them in the reverse order they were received, from the
> > > newest to the oldest. BGP then compares the routes in pairs
> > > starting with the newest entry and moving toward the oldest entry
> > > (starting at top of
> > the
> > > list and moving down). For example, entry1 and entry2 are
> > > compared.
> > The
> > > best of these two is then compared to entry3, and so on.
> > >
> > > Example 1: Both Commands Disabled
> > >
> > > Entry1 and entry2 are compared first. Entry2 is chosen as the best
> > > of these two because it has a lower router ID. The MED is not
> > > checked
> > since
> > > the paths are from a different neighbor AS.
> > > Shouldn't example 1 instead say, "Entry2 is chosen as the best of
> > these
> > > two because it has an OLDER received path"?
> > > Step 10 of the BGP Bestpath Selection states.
> > > "When both paths are EXTERNAL, prefer the OLDEST path." Isn't
> > > Entry2 "older" than Entry1? Or is something wrong with my
> > > understanding of this English?
> > >
> > > TIA.
> > > Elmer
> > >
> > > BTW - do you guys/gals have a recommendation on very good lab
> > scenarios
> > > to bring the true IOS behavior of these different BGP "knobs" to
> > > life? There are so many changes to the 12.2 release that it makes
> > > me not
> > want
> > > to dwell too much on Halabi's book. I wish Doyle had THREE
> > > chapters on this instead of two (pity he spent three chapters on
> > > Multicast
> > instead).
> > > .
> > .
> > .
> .
.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Feb 01 2003 - 07:33:40 GMT-3