From: Scott Morris (smorris@internetworkexpert.com)
Date: Tue Jan 13 2009 - 12:19:53 ARST
It's always good to listen to the recommendations of those with
experience... I'm pretty sure that's why we are instructors.
Now, I'm happy that 72.3% of my students pass if they follow my
recommendations, but I'm really bummed that Bart Simpson is not backing me
up. I'm going to have to work on that as it is clearly a deficiency in my
marketing ability.
(smirk)
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Narbik Kocharians
Sent: Monday, January 12, 2009 3:52 PM
To: Hobbs
Cc: Pavel Bykov; Tyson Scott; mike jones; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: Frame-relay Fragmentation!
But if you did not know or understand that the headers were also included
you could have made some basic mistakes.
I honestly think that the wordings get easier if you know most, if not all
of your options. I see that lots of people are equating some words with some
commands, and i believe that to be the wrong way of studying because they
are trying to learn to pass the exam and NOT the technology.
Hey....i could be wrong, but that is my take on this matter, and i feel
strong about this because 68 percent of my students that take my
recommendation PASS, so i have to state what i see and believe. The last
thing i like to do is argue.
__________________________
| ^^^^^^^ | / \
| | | Hey you..... |
| | | trust is a must |
| (o)(o) o \ I passed by listening to
Narbik |
@ _) o ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| ,____| o
| /
/____\
On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 12:38 PM, Hobbs <deadheadblues@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yeah, but isn't the lab written in "words"? I do know what you're saying,
> but even your first example says "largest packet size" :-)
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 1:33 PM, Narbik Kocharians
<narbikk@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> You should NOT look for words, you should focus on knowing what it does
>> and where to use it and how and where it helps.
>>
>>
>> The topology is as follows:
>>
>>
>>
R1---S0/0--10.1.12.1/24-----------------Frame-relay--------------------10.1.
12.2/24--S0/0----R2
>>
>> R1's Loopback is 1.1.1.1/8
>> R2's Loopback is 2.2.2.2/8
>>
>>
>> *Task 1*
>>
>>
>>
>> Configure Frame-relay Fragmentation between the two routers such that the
>> largest packet size is 80 Bytes.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *On Both Routers:*
>>
>>
>>
>> Rx(config)#interface S0/0
>>
>> Rx(config-if)#Frame-relay fragment 80 end-to-end
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *To verify the configuration:*
>>
>> * *
>>
>> *On R1*
>>
>>
>>
>> *R1#Show frame-relay pvc 102*
>>
>>
>>
>> PVC Statistics for interface Serial1/0 (Frame Relay DTE)
>>
>>
>>
>> DLCI = 102, DLCI USAGE = LOCAL, PVC STATUS = ACTIVE, INTERFACE =
Serial0/0
>>
>>
>>
>> input pkts 0 output pkts 0 in bytes 0
>>
>> out bytes 0 dropped pkts 0 in pkts dropped 0
>>
>>
>> out pkts dropped 0 out bytes dropped 0
>>
>> in FECN pkts 0 in BECN pkts 0 out FECN pkts 0
>>
>>
>> out BECN pkts 0 in DE pkts 0 out DE pkts 0
>>
>>
>> out bcast pkts 0 out bcast bytes 0
>>
>> 5 minute input rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec
>>
>> 5 minute output rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec
>>
>> pvc create time 00:29:43, last time pvc status changed 00:28:34
>>
>> * fragment type end-to-end fragment size 80*
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *Note the output of the above show command reveals that Frame-relay
>> fragmentation is enabled and the type is set to end-to-end which is
FRF.12
>> *
>>
>> * *
>>
>> * *
>>
>> *To test the configuration:*
>>
>> * *
>>
>> *On R1*
>>
>> * *
>>
>> *R1#Ping 10.1.12.2 size 80 repeat 1*
>>
>>
>>
>> Type escape sequence to abort.
>>
>> Sending 1, 80-byte ICMP Echos to 10.1.12.2, timeout is 2 seconds:
>>
>> *!*
>>
>> *Success rate is 100 percent (1/1),* round-trip min/avg/max = 64/64/64 ms
>>
>>
>>
>> *R1#Show frame-relay fragment 102 *
>>
>>
>>
>> interface dlci frag-type size in-frag out-frag
>> dropped-frag
>>
>> Se0/0 102 end-to-end *80 2 2*
>> 0* *
>>
>> * *
>>
>> *Note the fragmentation size is set to 80 Bytes, and the size of the ping
>> packet was 80 Bytes as well, but the output of the above show command
>> reveals that there were two fragmented packets. This is because the size
of
>> the frame-relay header was NOT considered when the size of the ping
packet
>> was configured. The actual size of the frame-relay header is 2 Bytes, and
as
>> a result of that, the size of the ping packet was 82 Bytes,
>> therefore, 2 fragmented packets were generated.*
>>
>> * *
>>
>> *To test this further:*
>>
>> * *
>>
>> *On R1*
>>
>>
>>
>> *R1#clear counters*
>>
>> * *
>>
>> Clear "show interface" counters on all interfaces [confirm]
>>
>> R1#
>>
>>
>>
>> *R1#Ping 10.1.12.2 size 78 repeat 1*
>>
>>
>>
>> Type escape sequence to abort.
>>
>> Sending 1, 78-byte ICMP Echos to 10.1.12.2, timeout is 2 seconds:
>>
>> *!*
>>
>> *Success rate is 100 percent (1/1),* round-trip min/avg/max = 40/40/40 ms
>>
>> R1#
>>
>>
>>
>> *R1#Show frame-relay fragment 102*
>>
>>
>>
>> interface dlci frag-type size in-frag out-frag
>> dropped-frag
>>
>> Se0/0 102 end-to-end 80 0 0
>> 0
>>
>> * *
>>
>> *Note the above Show command reveals that the ICMP packet was NOT
>> fragmented; the size of the ICMP packet is 78 Bytes plus the two Bytes of
>> Frame-relay header equals to 80 Bytes, therefore, it does not need to get
>> fragmented.*
>>
>> * *
>>
>> *To test the configuration further:*
>>
>> * *
>>
>> *On R1*
>>
>> * *
>>
>> *R1#Ping 10.1.12.2 size 79 repeat 1 *
>>
>>
>>
>> Type escape sequence to abort.
>>
>> Sending 1, 79-byte ICMP Echos to 10.1.12.2, timeout is 2 seconds:
>>
>> *!*
>>
>> *Success rate is 100 percent (1/1),* round-trip min/avg/max = 60/60/60 ms
>>
>>
>>
>> *R1#Show frame-relay fragment 102*
>>
>> * *
>>
>> interface dlci frag-type size in-frag out-frag
>> dropped-frag
>>
>> Se0/0 102 end-to-end 80 2 2
>> 0
>>
>> R1#* *
>>
>> i hope this helped.
>> On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 11:21 AM, Pavel Bykov
<slidersv@gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Also look for "Large data packets" and "voice packets are prioritized
>>> although are waiting behind large packets that take long to send out"
>>>
>>> Tyson, correction: Reducing delay, since there is no way to prevent it
:)
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 7:21 PM, Tyson Scott <tscott@ipexpert.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Mike,
>>> >
>>> > Or if the question talks about preventing serialization delay.
>>> >
>>> > Regards,
>>> >
>>> > Tyson Scott - CCIE #13513 R&S and Security
>>> > Technical Instructor - IPexpert, Inc.
>>> >
>>> > Telephone: +1.810.326.1444
>>> > Cell: +1.248.504.7309
>>> > Fax: +1.810.454.0130
>>> > Mailto: tscott@ipexpert.com
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > -----Original Message-----
>>> > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
>>> Of
>>> > Hobbs
>>> > Sent: Monday, January 12, 2009 11:54 AM
>>> > To: mike jones
>>> > Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>>> > Subject: Re: Frame-relay Fragmentation!
>>> >
>>> > Off the top of my head, maybe something like "maximum packet size"...
>>> >
>>> > On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 9:50 AM, mike jones <ccie1q2008@hotmail.com>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > Group,
>>> > > What key words in a tasks will lead you to frame-relay
>>> fragmentation
>>> > as
>>> > > the solution?
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > Thanks!
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > Mike
>>> > >
>>> > > _________________________________________________________________
>>> > > Windows Live : Keep your life in sync.
>>> > >
>>> http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_t1_allup_explore_012009
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> _______________________________________________________________________
>>> > > Subscription information may be found at:
>>> > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>>> >
>>> >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Mar 01 2009 - 09:43:37 ARST