Re: EIGRP authentication using key chain with validity period

Now see that would be where I would say the issue of semantics can cloud
things.

The training materials provided would be so articulate and precise whereas
in the lab the wording for such a task would leave little to doubt.

Hold tight - I have an observance that I need to craft about the diff
between proctors and trainers and their presentations. It might be
interesting to some.

On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 1:54 PM, Scott Morris <smorris_at_ine.com> wrote:

> Please god, tell me that nuclear science is able to differentiate between
> "up to" and "including".
>
> Of not, we are all so incredibly hosed.
>
> Two difference command sets: Key Chain times vs. ACL Time-Range times have
> entirely different treatments and syntaxes. A candidate should be aware of
> both as well as what the difference in semantics happens to be.
>
>
>
>
> *Scott Morris*, CCIE*x4* (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider) #4713,
>
> JNCIE-M #153, JNCIS-ER, CISSP, et al.
>
> JNCI-M, JNCI-ER
>
> evil_at_ine.com
>
>
> Internetwork Expert, Inc.
>
> http://www.InternetworkExpert.com <http://www.internetworkexpert.com/>
>
> Toll Free: 877-224-8987
>
> Outside US: 775-826-4344
>
>
> Knowledge is power.
>
> Power corrupts.
>
> Study hard and be Eeeeviiiil......
>
>
>
>
>
> Darby Weaver wrote:
>
> There is always a little debate on this question - I think the consensus is
> to make the lab work wherever possible. So setting the clock seems
> obvious. 8:00am versus 7:59am - > I'd check with the proctor. Since to me
> the two are remarkable different as in the 7:59 does not equal 8:00 - Hey
> I studied Nuclear Science - what do I know about math.
>
> Asking the proctor is not a bad thing and it lets the proctor know you have
> a clue too. It seems that this may be worthwhile in a world of OEQ.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 7:36 AM, Anh Khoa Le Viet <lvakhoa_at_gmail.com> <lvakhoa_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> Hi Group,
>
> I took a mock lab from a vendor today with task about the EIGRP
> authentication: An MD5 hash of the password CISCO1 should be used from
> 12:00AM on
> 1/1/2006 to 11:59PM on 12/31/2006 and An MD5 hash of the password CISCO2
> should be used after this. I think I come out with the right solution:
>
> key chain EIGRP
> key 1
> key-string CISCO1
> accept-lifetime 00:00:00 Jan 1 2006 00:29:59 Jan 1 2007
> send-lifetime 00:00:00 Jan 1 2006 11:59:59 Dec 31 2006
> key 2
> key-string CISCO2
> accept-lifetime 00:00:00 Jan 1 2007 infinite
> send-lifetime 00:00:00 Jan 1 2007 infinite
>
> But the thing is: do we need to configure ntp server and client for this
> kind of task? At the time I did the configuration, the clock showed in
> Routers is 2009 year time. But at the end of the lab, I did reboot all the
> routers and found out that EIGRP did come up, quickly found that the clock
> was back to 2002 and no EIGRP neighbors came up :(. We can not do set
> datetime manually on the routers as if we reboot, it will came back to
> default datetime, so the only option is NTP.
>
> Could you pleas give some advise on this kind of task? Should we add NTP in
> the real lab or no need to do that if in the IP Services portion, no NTP
> task?
>
> Thanks and best Regards,
> Khoa
>
>
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Sat Jul 11 2009 - 14:08:47 ART