From: Li Guoyi (Guoyi.Li@scs.com.sg)
Date: Mon Mar 26 2007 - 01:55:51 ART
Thanks Scott,
You give me a better idea to approach this vague issue. One more
question, let us say "resiliency" is not mentioned in the redistribution
question, but it is mentioned in the beginning of IGP section. Do I need
to consider all the worse case scenarios, like what if this link fails,
and what if that link fails, etc? If I do so, I will make it very
difficult. How resilient is resilent enough? Or still I need to clarify
with proctor?
Thanks,
-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Morris [mailto:smorris@ipexpert.com]
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 12:45 PM
To: Li Guoyi; smorris@ipexpert.com; 'Narbik Kocharians';
achievewoo@gmail.com
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: BGP issue
When it comes to redistribution, things are not always clear.
So the question becomes, how much redistribution to you need to do in
order to assure full reachability (if that is the goal)?
Different labs do it differently. Often due to the lab author's whim,
or what the lab is asking for. I know that doesn't always give much
help there, but if doing mutual redistribution on a single router works
just fine and doesn't cause problems (and the lab isn't asking for
resiliency) then you should be ok.
If the lab is asking for more, perhaps not.
The proctor should be there for clarification purposes, but it boils
down to asking the question properly! If you ask a vague question about
"should this be in two places", I would expect a vague answer. If you
phrase things more like you know what you can do, and are capable of
doing whatever the answer is, that may give the proctor a better chance
to answer you without feeling like they are giving away an answer.
"I have seen this done with mutual redistribution on multiple routers,
but the way I am reading this leads me to believe I can do it on just
one router. Is there any preference that you have on this, or am I
missing something in trying to understand the requirements here?"
Try to keep things as simple as possible, yet highlighting the idea that
you can perform whatever task it is.
HTH,
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
Li Guoyi
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 12:35 AM
To: smorris@ipexpert.com; Narbik Kocharians; achievewoo@gmail.com
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: BGP issue
Hi Scott,
Sometimes the requirement is not so explicit. For example, there are two
border routers between ospf and eigrp. The lab requires the reachability
of eigrp from ospf. In this case, if I do mutual redistribtion at one
border routers, it fulfills the requirement. Normally all the workbooks
do mutual redistribution at both border routers and play with
tag/distance. It makes redistribution a bit complicated. Since I lost
points in IGP, I am not sure I did it correctly by doing mutual
redistribution at one border router only.
Can you please enlighten me?
If I clarify this with proctor, will I get answer or just be asked to
read the question? I am confused by the lab requirement sometimes.
Thanks,
-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Morris [mailto:smorris@ipexpert.com]
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 11:40 AM
To: Li Guoyi; 'Narbik Kocharians'; achievewoo@gmail.com
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: BGP issue
I think that the lab exam would be fairly explicit about what things you
were required to or not to be able to ping.
Just remember that routing works both directions! So not only do you
need to see a route to get there, but you need to advertise a route so
that the BB device can get back as well!
HTH,
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
Li Guoyi
Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2007 11:26 PM
To: Narbik Kocharians; achievewoo@gmail.com
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: BGP issue
Hi Narbik,
How about those IGP routes from backbone devices? Is it required to ping
them?
Another one confused me is the links to backbone devices. Sometimes,
they are not in any IGP. In such case, do I need to do "redistribute
connected"?
Thanks!
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Narbik Kocharians
Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2007 10:28 AM
To: achievewoo@gmail.com
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: BGP issue
NOT unless you were asked to do so, think that you are in the court, you
want to answer the question/s without providing more info, or less info.
On 3/24/07, achievewoo@gmail.com <achievewoo@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,group
> In real lab exam, do I have to make every bgp route reachable or
> pingable?
> Assume backbone routers did not join IGP, should I redistibute BGP
> route to IGP to make sure the full connection in POD network?
> What will proctor say ?
> Any suggestion will be apreciated!
> Thanks!
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> _ Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
-- Narbik Kocharians CCIE# 12410 (R&S, SP, Security) CCSI# 30832 Network Learning, Inc. (CCIE class Instructor) www.ccbootcamp.com (CCIE Training)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Apr 01 2007 - 06:35:52 ART