From: Scott Morris (swm@emanon.com)
Date: Sun Mar 04 2007 - 11:36:38 ART
So you are asking whether or not the proctor would lie, or your friend would
lie? :)
That statement is correct. As you'd see in many archive discussions, as
long as you do not violate some rule of the lab, then overconfiguration is
not a problem.
Scott Morris, CCIE4 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider) #4713, JNCIE
#153, CISSP, et al.
CCSI/JNCI-M/JNCI-J
IPexpert VP - Curriculum Development
IPexpert Sr. Technical Instructor
smorris@ipexpert.com
http://www.ipexpert.com
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
yousef mohammed
Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2007 1:21 AM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Fwd: Extra configuration will not loose marks
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: yousef mohammed <ccie2752536@gmail.com>
Date: Mar 4, 2007 7:47 AM
Subject: Extra configuration will not loose marks
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Dear All
One of my friends attend the CCIE lab recently, the Procter Told
him " any extra configuration that will not change the behavior of your
network will no cause any mark detection"
now, do you believe that this is correct. i mean i can do for example the
tagging for the routes when i do mutual redistribution between OSPF and
EIGRP (not needed), just to be in the safe side, to be sure no routing loops
will occour under any circumentances.
regards
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Apr 01 2007 - 06:35:50 ART