From: John Matijevic (matijevi@bellsouth.net)
Date: Mon Jul 28 2003 - 12:42:33 GMT-3
Hello Wing,
I understand your concern, and we could discuss hundreds of topics of
requested to do and should do, scenerios, I believe that this type of
learning comes over time, and there is no clear black and white answer to
this. My suggestion would be to read the question carefully and if you have
any concerns on the interpretation of the question then you ask the author
of the question, or in lab situation the proctor. I am sorry if this didnt
answer your question, my initial intent was to help you understand how the
virtual-link works, which im sure you know how.
Sincerely,
Matijevic
----- Original Message -----
From: <wing_lam@jossynergy.com>
To: "John Matijevic" <matijevi@bellsouth.net>
Cc: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003 11:23 AM
Subject: Re: OSPF virtual link
> Hi John,
>
> When R1 downs, area 1 can reach area 0 though virtual-link R2--R3; when R2
> downs, area 2 can reach aera 0 by virtual-link R1--R3; that's the
> resilience.
>
> I hope so the answer as what you explained, but I have finished two
> similate LAB question that all of them has two virtual-link cofigured in
> answer.
>
> That seems some discrepancy between "requested to do" and "should do".
>
> Thx,
> BBD (Big Black Dog)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "John Matijevic"
> <matijevi@bellsou To:
<wing_lam@jossynergy.com>, <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> th.net> cc:
> Subject: Re: OSPF virtual
link
> 07/28/2003 11:11
> PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hello Wing,
> There is no need here for a virtual-link in this case, becuase as long as
> you have an interface that is attatched to Area0, which you do in this
> case.
> I am a little unclear on what you mean to enhance the resilience. I hope
> this answers your question.
> Sincerely,
> Matijevic
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <wing_lam@jossynergy.com>
> To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003 10:54 AM
> Subject: OSPF virtual link
>
>
> > Hi group,
> >
> > I am working on an OSPF question, the scenario as following:
> >
> > Area 0
> > ------R1---------------R2-------
> > Area 1 | Area 2
> > |
> > R3
> >
> > That means R1 an ABR of area 0 and 1, R2 is ABR of area 0 and 2, R3 is
> ABR
> > of area 1 and 2.
> >
> > The question is just to establish connectivity but no other request.
> >
> > Should I also establish the two virtual link (R2--R3 for area 1, R1--R3
> for
> > area 2); so that to enhance the resilience which the question itself
> hasn't
> > request to do so?
> >
> > Thx,
> > BBD (Big Black Dog)
> >
> > DISCLAIMER:- This email is confidential and intended only for the use
of
> > the individual or entity named above and may contain information that is
> > privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that
> > any dissemination, distribution or copying of this email is strictly
> > prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify us
> > immediately by return email or telephone and destroy the original
> message.
> > Thank you.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > You are subscribed to the GroupStudy.com CCIE R&S Discussion Group.
> >
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> You are subscribed to the GroupStudy.com CCIE R&S Discussion Group.
>
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Aug 06 2003 - 06:52:56 GMT-3