From: Jonathan V Hays (jhays@jtan.com)
Date: Thu Jan 16 2003 - 11:16:45 GMT-3
Regarding what you were told about not getting docked points, unless it
was a Cisco proctor who told you that, I would be skeptical.
-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Home [mailto:clarson52@comcast.net]
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 11:26 PM
To: Jonathan V Hays; 'chris a'
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: Mutual redistribution (Interesting Challenge??)
Do whatever is best and works for you. One way is usually not the only
way or necessarily the absolute correct way to do things in the Cisco
lab world I am not looking for a gauruntee or for some written rule to
it, but there is logic. I would like to find the logic behind why it
would ever be necessary. I am convinced there is no need to filter when
restributing one protocol to another on a single router to avoid routing
a routing loop caused by the redistribution. I have to go by that as a
my own rule until someone shows me otherwise or I have an experience
that contradicts it. I can only know what I think I know through
experience and learning until there is evidence to the contrary.
It would be an interesting challenge to come up with a scenario that
would require it.
BTW - I have asked the question about extra configuration. I was told
that you are not docked points for having extra configuration as long as
the requirements are met. I would not gauruntee it. It is just what I
was told.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jonathan V Hays" <jhays@jtan.com>
To: "'chris a'" <chris_atkins@blueyonder.co.uk>
Cc: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 8:44 PM
Subject: RE: Mutual redistribution
> Chris,
>
> I'm sensing that you are looking for a rigid rule: a guarantee along
> the lines of "if there's only one redistribution point you don't need
> to worry about route filtering." I don't think anyone can give you
> such a guarantee.
>
> To restate what I said in a previous post in this thread, you are
> better off examining each situation carefully rather than always
> applying some rule (which may not be applicable in special
> circumstances).
>
> Ideally you should think ahead of time where the problems will be with
> mutual redistribution. But I use this crutch, since I am still
> learning. Once I have routing working properly, what I like to do
> *before* redistribution (as my lab study partner knows ;-) is to take
> a snapshot (in notepad) of every routing table. Do this BEFORE doing
> any redistribution. This way you can tell at a glance what routes
> belong where before redistribution messes everything up.
>
> After redistribute in both directions look at the resulting routing
> tables for routes that don't belong comparing them to the
> pre-redistributed tables. Some problems may be obvious administrative
> distance problems. Use trace to follow the less obvious paths.
>
> And I feel the solution of a complete set of filters every time you do
> redistribution may not be appropriate. And in some circumstances it is
> completely unnecessary. No one but Cisco knows the intimate details of
> how they grade the lab - but it may be possible to lose points for
> configuring something that's not required. Again - I'm not sure on
> this
> - just a rumor I've heard. When in doubt, ask the proctor.
>
> HTH,
>
> Jonathan
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
> Of chris a
> Sent: Friday, October 25, 2002 6:41 AM
> To: Jonathan V Hays
> Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: Mutual redistribution
>
>
> Hi,
> I have had many thoughts about this and with only 3 weeks to go until
> my lab I am start to worry. I have found in Karl Solie's CCIE
> practical studies on page 621 he states the following.
>
> R1----------------R2------------------R3-----------------R4
>
> | ----- RIP version 1 ------------------|---EIGRP2001------|
>
>
> When performing mutual redistribution on R3 becuace there is only one
> redistribution point there is no need to perform any route filtering
> when using mutual redistribution.
>
> Any thoughts anyone please.
>
>
> Chris
>
>
>
> >
> > Hi,
> > In case I am doing a mutual redistribution at a single point between
> > any two routing protocols , do I really ever need to filter the
> > routes
>
> > that are being redistributed for prevention of a loop.....????????
> >
> > I have never done this and have had no problems till now..... But
> > wouldnt want to discover something new during my lab.....
> >
> > But is there any case where filtering is required in for such a
> > redistribution?....what is the normal thing to do??
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> > Vijay.
> > .
.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Feb 01 2003 - 07:33:50 GMT-3