From: micsoniu@telus.net
Date: Tue Jul 13 2004 - 19:23:37 GMT-3
Here is the wording:
"Configure R3 to unicast its RIP routing updates to R2. Do not use the neighbor
command to achieve this but consider using other IP features to aid you."
The good thing about this book is the "Ask the Proctor" section, with examples
of "valid" Q & A:
Q: Surely the only way to make RIP unicast routing updates is to use the
neighbor command and passive-interface?
A: There is another way of forcing this; try to use other IP features if you
find that you can not accomplish this using RIP features.
Q: Is it acceptable to use a NAT list to convert my RIP multicast into a
unicast?
A: If you answer the question effectively, this is acceptable.
...
What would you think ? NAT or GRE ? I would not consider GRE a valid solution,
since for me it sounds like the RIP updates have to be unicast ...
Thank you
Quoting Scott Morris <swm@emanon.com>:
> That's very true, and I suppose it would depend on the exact wording of the
> lab.
>
> If it simply said 'unicast packets' I would argue that GRE tunnel from
> source to destination are exactly that, unicast packets.
>
> On the other hand, if it said 'unicast RIP packets', then I would agree
> with
> you that RIP is still multicast in that concept.
>
> Fun stuff though. :)
>
>
> Scott Morris, CCIE4 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider) #4713, CISSP,
> JNCIP, et al.
> IPExpert CCIE Program Manager
> IPExpert Sr. Technical Instructor
> swm@emanon.com/smorris@ipexpert.net
> http://www.ipexpert.net
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: micsoniu@telus.net [mailto:micsoniu@telus.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2004 5:52 PM
> To: Scott Morris
> Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: CCIE Routing and Switching Practice Labs!!!
>
>
> Scott,
>
> I think that this solution addresses the issue of limiting the number a RIP
> routers to only two and not a RIP unicast packet.
>
> Although the tunnel is a point-to-point connection, the passenger protocol
> is still RIP multicast 224.0.0.9 UDP 520.
>
> The NAT solution is replacing the multicast 224.0.0.9 address to the
> unicast
> IP destination address and leaves the UDP port number unchanged.
>
> Right / Wrong ?
>
> Thank you
>
> Quoting Scott Morris <swm@emanon.com>:
>
> > That's an interesting solution for the problem, but exactly the right
> > type of thinking!
> >
> > The lab is a results-based approach, at least as long as you don't
> > violate what may be a myriad of rules and restrictions! Since nothing
> > was specified regarding GRE, it is perfectly fair game for you to
> > accomplish the correct results. :)
> >
> > This Ciscopress book, although written by lab proctors needs to be
> > approached in the same way as anyone else's labs. IPExpert's,
> > NetMasterClass', InternetworkExpert's, CCBootcamp's or whoever else's
> > you use... The solutions provided with the labs do NOT reflect the
> > ONLY way to accomplish those things. They merely reflect whatever the
> > lab author happened to be thinking about at that point in time or what
> > they were used to doing.
> >
> > Great thinking though!!
> >
> >
> > Scott Morris, CCIE4 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider) #4713,
> > CISSP, JNCIP, et al.
> > IPExpert CCIE Program Manager
> > IPExpert Sr. Technical Instructor
> > swm@emanon.com/smorris@ipexpert.net
> > http://www.ipexpert.net
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
> > Of Joe Rinehart
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2004 12:23 PM
> > To: CCIE; 'Koen Peetermans'; 'Sergio Jimenez Arguedas';
> > ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: Re: CCIE Routing and Switching Practice Labs!!!
> >
> > I think it accurately reflects the kinds of things that can be asked,
> > and trust me when I say there are many ways to get the right solution.
> >
> > For example, consider the requirement to send unicast RIP updates
> > without the neighbor command. I must have tried ten things that
> > didn't work before a light went off in my head. I ended up building a
> > GRE tunnel, because that would indeed be a unicast solution. Here is
> > what it ended up looking like:
> >
> > R3 (an old 7010, so had some limitations):
> >
> > interface Tunnel0
> > ip unnumbered Ethernet1/0
> > tunnel source Ethernet1/0
> > tunnel destination 172.16.0.1
> >
> > router rip
> > version 2
> > passive-interface Ethernet1/0
> > passive-interface Ethernet1/1
> > passive-interface Serial2/0
> > passive-interface Serial2/1
> > passive-interface Serial2/2
> > passive-interface Serial2/4
> > passive-interface Serial2/5
> > passive-interface Serial2/6
> > passive-interface Serial2/7
> > offset-list 0 in 16 Tunnel0
> > offset-list 1 out 14 Tunnel0
> > network 60.0.0.0
> > network 172.16.0.0
> >
> > R2 (a 2501):
> >
> > interface Tunnel0
> > ip unnumbered Ethernet0
> > tunnel source Ethernet0
> > tunnel destination 172.16.0.2
> >
> > router rip
> > version 2
> > network 10.0.0.0
> > network 172.16.0.0
> > no auto-summary
> >
> > The reason for the distribute-list statement on R3 is that dual routes
> > were being announced from R2 (one across the tunnel and one on the
> > Ethernet interface). But the bottom line is that it satisfied the
> requirements.
> >
> > What disturbed me (keep in mind I go to SJ two weeks from Friday for
> > my fourth and hopefully last attempt) is that the answer key listed
> > NAT as being the solution, but since I felt my answer wass equally
> > valid, I went to the source---the proctor who authored the book. He
> > is a very cool guy who has proctored my exam previously and probably
> > will supervise this time around as well. In his response to me he
> > said my solution was absolutely valid because nothing in the
> > requirements prohibited use of a GRE tunnel.
> > I
> > felt much better after that.
> >
> > It's very triue to the exam and in fact the proctor I asked the
> > opinion of specifically said they were designed to mirror the real thing.
> >
> > Joe Rinehart
> > AT&T Data Network Consultant
> > Pacific Northwest Enterprise Markets
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "CCIE" <ccie@gmx.net>
> > To: "'Koen Peetermans'" <K.Peetermans@chello.be>; "'Sergio Jimenez
> > Arguedas'" <sejimenez@its.co.cr>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2004 2:48 AM
> > Subject: AW: CCIE Routing and Switching Practice Labs!!!
> >
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Can you recommend this book? Is is worth to buy it? I go thru the
> > > first Sample Lab and I think this book is too strange for the real CCIE
> Lab.
> > > Especially that task to use RIP Unicast without the neighbor
> > > statement
> > and
> > > the DLSW section with(NAT). And also the part with Voice over
> > > Framrelay
> > wich
> > > is also not covered in the actual lab. I can not believe that such
> > things
> > > will be in the real lab? Can someone confirme this or Iam not right?
> > >
> > > Regards
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Urspr|ngliche Nachricht-----
> > > Von: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] Im Auftrag
> > > von Koen Peetermans
> > > Gesendet: Dienstag, 13. Juli 2004 10:56
> > > An: 'Sergio Jimenez Arguedas'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > > Betreff: RE: CCIE Routing and Switching Practice Labs!!!
> > >
> > > Hi Sergio,
> > >
> > > I picked up the book at DHL this morning, only to find that the CD
> > > was
> > not
> > > included as well..
> > >
> > > I have send a mail to ciscopress in complain about this and request
> > > the
> > CD.
> > >
> > > Kind regards,
> > >
> > > Koen.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
> > > Of Sergio Jimenez Arguedas
> > > Sent: zaterdag 10 juli 2004 0:43
> > > To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > > Subject: CCIE Routing and Switching Practice Labs!!!
> > >
> > > Hi Group,
> > >
> > >
> > > I am from Costa Rica and I bought the book in Walmart.com.
> > >
> > > I received the book this afternoon, but It didn4t have the CD. The
> > > books says that It has a CD with the solutions of the six labs.
> > >
> > >
> > > Do somebody have the CD? Can somebody send me the solutions, please?
> > >
> > >
> > > Rgds,
> > >
> > >
> > > Sergio
> > >
> > > ____________________________________________________________________
> > > ___ 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
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________________
> > _ 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 : Sun Aug 01 2004 - 10:11:54 GMT-3