From: Chalermchai Hoonpongsimanont (david.hoon@gmail.com)
Date: Sun Sep 26 2004 - 04:42:16 GMT-3
Hi,
Please consider following question .. found many like this on practice labs ..
=========================================================
R1 -- RIP -- R2 -- OSPF -- R3
Configure five loopback interfaces on R1. Give IP address of
192.168.x.0/24, where x=1,2,3,4,5. On R1, advertise all loopback into
RIP domain. Make sure R2 has all five routes to these loopback
addresses in routing table.
On R2, redistribute RIP into OSPF. Make sure that R3 see only "odd"
routes. Use minimum of configuration line on R2.
=========================================================
I understand that this kind of question has an objective to verify
candidate's understanding of using access-list. The common answer to
this question is to use access-list on R2. As expected, the lab answer
use route-map, match ip address from access-list, and apply this
route-map with redistribution command.
However, using access-list won't use minimum configuration line on R2.
What if I configured R1 to tag all routes I want R2 to redistribute to
R3 (also use RIP version 2), then on R2, create a route-map to match
only these tags. I will get the same result, with less configuration
line.
I heard that proctor use script to verify my configuration. As a
script kiddy, I think their script will look for my access-list.
Obviously, the script will not find any on R2.
Will I get the point? If you have only five minutes left, and don't
have a chance to ask the proctor anymore, which way you guys will use?
Cheers,
David
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Oct 01 2004 - 15:00:49 GMT-3