From: Khalifa Diop (califegeneral@hotmail.com)
Date: Tue Oct 17 2006 - 15:34:38 ART
I am purchasing a lab practice kit and am leaning towards IP Experts ver
8.1. What do you think.
Shoudl i consider another vendor?
Thanks
>From: Tim Chan <timanji@yahoo.com>
>Reply-To: Tim Chan <timanji@yahoo.com>
>To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>Subject: bgp dmzlink-bw verification
>Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 10:39:40 -0700 (PDT)
>
>Hi all,
>
>I'm trying to understand the output I'm getting when I configure "bgp
>dmzlink-bw".
>After my configuration is done, I get the following output:
>R2#sho ip bgp 0.0.0.0
>BGP routing table entry for 0.0.0.0/0, version 32
>Paths: (2 available, best #2, table Default-IP-Routing-Table)
>Multipath: iBGP
>Flag: 0x800
> Advertised to non peer-group peers:
> 145.1.245.5
> 100,
>(Received from a RR-client)
> 145.1.245.5 from 145.1.245.5 (150.1.5.5)
>Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 100, valid, internal, multipath
> DMZ-Link
>Bw 1 kbytes
> 100, (Received from a RR-client)
> 145.1.245.4 from
>145.1.245.4 (150.1.4.4)
> Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 100, valid,
>internal, multipath, best
> DMZ-Link Bw 1250 kbytes
>
>You can see that the
>route to R5 is 1kbps and R4 is 1250kbps.
>
>So when I do a "show ip route", I
>get the following:
>R2#sho ip route 0.0.0.0
>Routing entry for 0.0.0.0/0,
>supernet
> Known via "bgp 200", distance 200, metric 0, candidate default path
>Tag 100, type internal
> Last update from 145.1.245.4 00:00:28 ago
> Routing
>Descriptor Blocks:
> * 145.1.245.5, from 145.1.245.5, 00:00:28 ago
> Route
>metric is 0, traffic share count is 10
> AS Hops 1
> 145.1.245.4, from
>145.1.245.4, 00:00:28 ago
> Route metric is 0, traffic share count is 1
>AS Hops 1
>
>Note that I'm getting a traffic share count of 10:1. Which looks
>good, BUT, the 10 is
>towards the slower link, not the faster one. So normally
>I would read this as, "For every
>10 packets sent to R5, send 1 packet to R4."
>But this makes no sense!
>
>In looking at the doccd, the output in the examples
>follows what makes sense. The faster
>links get the larger ratios.
>http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios122/122newft/122t
>/122t2/ftbgplb.htm#wp1052316
>
>This is from IE Vol2 Lab 6, task 4.9. And even
>their verification output shows the same
>10:1 favor over the slower link. Are
>these outputs correct and I'm just reading it wrong?
>(But then the doccd shows
>otherwise)
>
>Please advise...
>-Tim
>
>_______________________________________________________________________
>Subscription information may be found at:
>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Nov 01 2006 - 07:29:05 ART