From: McClure, Allen (Allen.McClure@Yum.com)
Date: Mon Sep 08 2003 - 15:27:28 GMT-3
Usually these IGP routing issues result in bigger BGP oddities later.
If everything is reachable, move along and see if things remain workable
as you progress. The goal is "meet the requirements", which is open to
interpretation obviously. Keep that in mind as you move forward, and
like I said, it's probably going to require fixing later, but you'll
have direction at that point because they'll be something tangible not
working rather than a network that "just doesn't look right".
Hope that makes sense.
Allen G. McClure
CCNP/CCDP/MCSE
Yum! Brands, Inc.
Sr. Network Analyst
allen.mcclure@yum.com
-----Original Message-----
From: wsq [mailto:wsqccie@hotmail.com]
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2003 5:34 AM
To: Chen Kwong Wai William; Jonathan V Hays; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: Lab Scenario about OSPF nad EIGRP mutual redistribution,
Please comment.
I think you shoul d change the ospf or Eigrp distance which ospf's is
better
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chen Kwong Wai William" <kwchen@netvigator.com>
To: "Jonathan V Hays" <jhays@jtan.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 07, 2003 11:14 AM
Subject: Re: Lab Scenario about OSPF nad EIGRP mutual redistribution,
Please comment.
> Hi,
>
> But for this case, will you configure to make R3 prefer R2 for the
> route to R4?
>
> --- William
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jonathan V Hays" <jhays@jtan.com>
> To: "'Chen Kwong Wai William'" <kwchen@netvigator.com>;
> <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Sunday, September 07, 2003 2:45 AM
> Subject: RE: Lab Scenario about OSPF nad EIGRP mutual redistribution,
Please
> comment.
>
>
> You will have to perform configurations that are not specified
> exactly, in order to get meet the lab requirements.
>
> From what I've seen, you will not lose points in the CCIE lab for
> overconfiguring, unless your extra configuration breaks a requirement
> or unless the particular extra configuration steps are prohibited
> (e.g., static routes).
>
> HTH,
>
> Jonathan
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
> Of Chen Kwong Wai William
> Sent: Saturday, September 06, 2003 1:51 PM
> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Lab Scenario about OSPF nad EIGRP mutual redistribution,
> Please comment.
>
>
> Dear all,
>
> R4
> | |
> |- R2 --------- R1
> | |
> | |
> |- R3 ---------- |
> |
>
> I think it is quite a common scenario in Lab, Suppose
> R1, R2, R3 (a point-to-multipoint network)is connected \
> by frame relay and runs in OSPF backbone. R2, R3 is also connected by
> Fast Ethernet and runs EIGRP. Finally, R2, R4 is connected by Serial
> Point-to-point line and runs in OSPF non-backbone area.
>
> After mutual redistribution in R2 and R3 and proper
> filter to prevent route feedback. You may find that
> R3 is prefer R1 as a next-hop to reach R4, becuase
> OSPF is prefer than external EIGRP routes.
>
> My question is if you are not ask to do any configuration
> to make R3 to prefer R2 as next-hop to go the R4 in the
> lab, will you do it? Will this additional work make you
> lose marks in lab. Do you think to prefer OSPF backbone
> is a normal situation or not?
>
> Sorry for my poor ASCII drawing.
>
> - William
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> _
> 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 Oct 01 2003 - 07:24:24 GMT-3