From: Karim (karim_ccie@hotmail.com)
Date: Fri Feb 27 2004 - 12:15:51 GMT-3
I agree with you Scott but I don't see a meaning that someone is sending an
e-mail with a title "task x, lab.y" which is not representive at all.
Regards,
Karim.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Morris" <swm@emanon.com>
To: "'Richard Dumoulin'" <richard.dumoulin@vanco.es>; "'Scott, Tyson C'"
<tyson.scott@hp.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2004 4:57 PM
Subject: RE: TASK 11.1 on Lab 13
> Is there anything wrong with posting questions like that to a general
forum?
> I see people do it for CCBootcamp scenarios, for IPExpert scenarios, for
> NetMasterclass scenarios... Everyone has their own support forum, but
that
> doesn't preclude anyone from posting to Groupstudy to perhaps gain the
> opinions of people who aren't working on that scenario, or sharing a
thought
> process. :)
>
> The licensing agreement with each of the companies precludes you from
> sharing the lab with people (e.g. copying it), but not from asking
questions
> about it. Either that or the IE license seems to be interpreted
differently
> from others I've looked at. *shrug*
>
> Too much thinking. Relax more!
>
>
> Scott Morris, CCIE4 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider) #4713, CISSP,
> JNCIS, et al.
> IPExpert CCIE Program Manager
> IPExpert Sr. Technical Instructor
> swm@emanon.com/smorris@ipexpert.net
> http://www.ipexpert.net
>
> (as an obvious note, I'm not with IE, although I never have seen anyone
have
> a problem with posts from other lab vendors questions)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> Richard Dumoulin
> Sent: Friday, February 27, 2004 5:17 AM
> To: Scott, Tyson C; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: TASK 11.1 on Lab 13
>
> I just subscribed to the list yersteday and don't undertand why people are
> posting InternetworkExpert scenarios here instead of the IE forum.
> I can see 2 reason why this should be done on the forum:
>
> 1-- The answer to the issue would be recorded in IE forum for reference
of
> future IE customers
> 2-- Is not this breaking IE NDA ?
>
> Please note that I am only an IE customer and I may be wrong. If Brian(s)
> are not complaining ...
>
> Just my opinion
>
> --Richard Dumoulin
>
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: Scott, Tyson C [mailto:tyson.scott@hp.com] Enviado el: viernes, 27 de
> febrero de 2004 5:36
> Para: Scott, Tyson C; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Asunto: RE: TASK 11.1 on Lab 13
>
>
> This scenario is from Internetwork experts workbook incase you know the
> answer but are not responding because you think I am breaking the Cisco
> disclosure agreement
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> Scott, Tyson C
> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 8:46 PM
> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: TASK 11.1 on Lab 13
>
> I can't get the following scenario to work. Sending this to you guys to
see
> if you have any ideas?
>
> The requirements are to setup dialer peers on Router4 and 5. use ppp
> encapsulation between the two dial peers. Router5 will have the listed IP
> address below but router4 is supposed to request an IP address after it
sets
> up a connection with Router5. Router4 is also supposed to disconnect the
> callin from Router5 and callback Router5.
>
>
>
> Now all of this is working for me except for some reason which I don't
> understand Router4 gets the ip add 139.4.45.6/32 when I have it setup on
the
> server to send the address in the range of 139.4.45.0 - 255/24 excluding 0
> and .5 since this is the network address and IP address of Router5. So
> since router4 is getting the /32 it shows the 139.4.45.5 and 139.4.45.6/32
> as connected hosts and refuses the routes from Router5 because I am trying
> to inject a default route into it and I can see that
> Router5 is sending it and Router4 sees it but it rejects it because it
> believes it is from itself. I have been able to figure out why it is
broken
> but I cannot figure out how to fix it.
>
>
>
> Debug on ROUTER4 *Mar 1 08:57:48.661: RIP: ignored v2 update from bad
> source 139.4.45.5 on Dialer0
>
> DEBUG ON ROUTER5
>
> *Mar 1 06:53:02.214: RIP: sending v2 update to 224.0.0.9 via Dialer0
> (139.4.45.5)
>
> *Mar 1 06:53:02.214: RIP: build update entries
>
> *Mar 1 06:53:02.214: 0.0.0.0/0 via 0.0.0.0, metric 1, tag 0
>
> *Mar 1 06:53:02.214: 139.4.2.0/24 via 0.0.0.0, metric 1, tag 0
>
> *Mar 1 06:53:02.214: 139.4.5.0/24 via 0.0.0.0, metric 1, tag 0
>
> *Mar 1 06:53:02.214: 139.4.11.0/24 via 0.0.0.0, metric 1, tag 0
>
> *Mar 1 06:53:02.218: 139.4.15.0/24 via 0.0.0.0, metric 1, tag 0
>
>
>
> This is all you need to know from Router one is that I have the DHCP Pool
> setup correctly
>
> Router1
>
> ip dhcp excluded-address 139.4.45.0 139.4.45.3
>
> ip dhcp excluded-address 139.4.45.5
>
> !
>
> !
>
> ip dhcp pool ISDN
>
> network 139.4.45.0 255.255.255.0
>
> !
>
> !
>
> !
>
> Router5
>
> !
>
> ip dhcp-server 139.4.13.1
>
> !
>
> interface BRI0/0
>
> no ip address
>
> encapsulation ppp
>
> dialer pool-member 1
>
> isdn switch-type basic-ni
>
> isdn spid1 5272045
>
> !
>
> !
>
> interface Dialer0
>
> ip address 139.4.45.5 255.255.255.0
>
> encapsulation ppp
>
> ip policy route-map POLICY_ROUTE
>
> dialer pool 1
>
> dialer idle-timeout 0
>
> dialer string 5272044
>
> dialer watch-group 1
>
> dialer-group 1 (I don't have a dialer-list defined because using dialer
> watch)
>
> peer default ip address dhcp
>
> !
>
> router rip
>
> version 2
>
> timers basic 3 18 18 24
>
> redistribute isis level-1 metric 1
>
> passive-interface default
>
> no passive-interface BRI0/0
>
> no passive-interface Ethernet0/1
>
> no passive-interface Dialer0
>
> network 139.4.0.0
>
> network 150.4.0.0
>
> default-information originate route-map CONDITIONAL
>
> no auto-summary
>
> !
>
> dialer watch-list 1 ip 204.12.4.0 255.255.255.0
>
> !
>
> route-map CONDITIONAL permit 10
>
> match ip address prefix-list FRAME
>
> set interface Dialer0 (REMOVED this and it still did not work. I don't
> know what this is for but it was given in the example on cisco.com)
>
> !
>
>
>
>
>
> Router4
>
> !
>
> interface BRI0/0
>
> no ip address
>
> encapsulation ppp
>
> no logging event link-status
>
> dialer pool-member 1
>
> isdn switch-type basic-ni
>
> isdn spid1 5272044
>
> !
>
> !
>
> interface Dialer0
>
> ip address negotiated
>
> encapsulation ppp
>
> dialer pool 1
>
> dialer idle-timeout 0
>
> dialer string 5272045
>
> dialer caller 527xxxx callback
>
> dialer-group 1
>
> !
>
> router rip
>
> version 2
>
> timers basic 3 18 18 24
>
> redistribute connected route-map ETHERNET0/0->RIP
>
> network 139.4.0.0
>
> network 150.4.0.0
>
> no auto-summary
>
> !
>
> ROUTER4'S ROUTING TABLE
>
> B 119.0.0.0/8 [20/0] via 204.12.4.254, 00:29:19
>
> B 118.0.0.0/8 [20/0] via 204.12.4.254, 00:29:19
>
> B 117.0.0.0/8 [20/0] via 204.12.4.254, 00:29:19
>
> B 116.0.0.0/8 [20/0] via 204.12.4.254, 00:29:19
>
> 139.4.0.0/32 is subnetted, 2 subnets
>
> C 139.4.45.6 is directly connected, Dialer0
>
> C 139.4.45.5 is directly connected, Dialer0 (THIS IS WHAT IS
> CAUSING IT TO REFUSE THE UPDATES FROM ROUTER5) WHY IS THIS HERE?
>
> B 115.0.0.0/8 [20/0] via 204.12.4.254, 00:29:19
>
> C 204.12.4.0/24 is directly connected, Ethernet0/0
>
> B 114.0.0.0/8 [20/0] via 204.12.4.254, 00:29:19
>
> B 113.0.0.0/8 [20/0] via 204.12.4.254, 00:29:20
>
> B 112.0.0.0/8 [20/0] via 204.12.4.254, 00:29:21
>
> 28.0.0.0/24 is subnetted, 2 subnets
>
> B 28.119.17.0 [20/0] via 204.12.4.254, 00:29:21
>
> B 28.119.16.0 [20/0] via 204.12.4.254, 00:29:21
>
> 150.4.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets
>
> C 150.4.4.0 is directly connected, Loopback0
>
>
>
> Dialer0 is up, line protocol is up (spoofing)
>
> Hardware is Unknown
>
> Internet address is 139.4.45.6/32
>
> MTU 1500 bytes, BW 56 Kbit, DLY 20000 usec,
>
> reliability 255/255, txload 1/255, rxload 1/255
>
> Encapsulation PPP, loopback not set
>
> DTR is pulsed for 1 seconds on reset
>
> Interface is bound to BR0/0:1
>
> Interface is bound to BR0/0:2
>
> Last input never, output never, output hang never
>
> Last clearing of "show interface" counters 06:57:58
>
> Input queue: 0/75/0/0 (size/max/drops/flushes); Total output drops: 0
>
> Queueing strategy: weighted fair
>
> Output queue: 0/1000/64/0 (size/max total/threshold/drops)
>
> Conversations 0/1/16 (active/max active/max total)
>
> Reserved Conversations 0/0 (allocated/max allocated)
>
> Available Bandwidth 42 kilobits/sec
>
> 5 minute input rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec
>
> 5 minute output rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec
>
> 1231 packets input, 173609 bytes
>
> 1223 packets output, 80200 bytes
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> 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 Mar 05 2004 - 07:13:59 GMT-3