From: Howard C. Berkowitz (hcb@gettcomm.com)
Date: Mon Nov 03 2003 - 14:53:18 GMT-3
At 2:52 PM +0000 11/3/03, nettable_walker@comcast.net wrote:
>Lee, I have seen other posts on this list saying Cisco does not
>subtract for extra commands. I would be very careful with that!
>
>When I took my R/S lab on 10/15 I got done 3 hours early & it took
>all the self control I had NOT to go back & redo all kinds of stuff
>KNOWING that I could have done this this & this !
>
>The Instructors tell you when you get there not to overthink the questions -
>believe me, it's complicated enough as it is - there is no need to
>add anything that does not directly lead to the stated objective.
>
>Richard
>CCIE# 12388
I've never truly understood Cisco's philosophy on this. My own style
is to put in what some people call extra commands, but that I
consider things learned to improve troubleshooting. Mind you, I was
taking a graduate course in computer science, and begged the
professor for more time on my project. When he looked at my program,
he laughed and said that I was wasting time on writing comments,
testing to see if inputs were valid, generating diagnostics, etc. --
"this is college, after all."
I told him that if I learned to program his way, I'd get fired.
Things that I do in real life include:
-- always nailing the router ID
-- writing one 0.0.0.0 mask network statement for every OSPF interface
-- unless I'm doing hierarchical redistribution, ALWAYS putting in
loop prevention
-- frequently (and this might not be good for the lab, I agree)
putting in meaningful ip host statements for all the interface names
Yes, these take more time to write -- but if I do something wrong, it
makes the trouble much easier to shoot. I'd really hate to hear that
the CCIE lab was hyped about minimum number of statements and you
would lose points -- not just time -- for following good practice.
>//
>
>
>> All,
>>
>> I have a generic question that may have several opinions.
>>
>> If you are running an IBGP domain and one of the routers is not sending any
>> routes, it is merely learning routes from other IBGP speakers would you say
>> it is ok not to turn on things like "Send-Community, Next-Hop-Self"? Do you
>> think Cisco would take off points if they were there since these commands
>> aren't technically needed to make it work? I have heard that you can add
>> extra commands to get the job done and Cisco won't take points off for that
>> but I have to think they mean within reason. If someone went in and turned
>> on more than what is needed because they were unsure which command worked I
>> can't imagine that Cisco would award points because one of the nine commands
>> issued did the trick.
>>
>> thanks,
>> Lee
>>
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>> Please help support GroupStudy by purchasing your study materials from:
>> http://shop.groupstudy.com
>>
>> Subscription information may be found at:
>
>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>_______________________________________________________________________
>Please help support GroupStudy by purchasing your study materials from:
>http://shop.groupstudy.com
>
>Subscription information may be found at:
>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Dec 12 2003 - 12:29:07 GMT-3