Re: Core technology definition / more switching

There "may be" some troubleshooting for switches still in the config
section.

When you look at "nothing else depends on them" do you think that MPLS
can work without a good L2/L3 network? Just like in the v3 blueprint,
networks are still layered in nature and important to solve things for
the upper parts to work.

The thing is that with the "variety" of stuff in the v4 lab, each lab
may well have different requirements and perspectives about what is "core".

Keep in mind that not all of the new sexy topics will appear on every
single lab. That doesn't help much in the preparation, but it certainly
helps with how bad any single exam may appear! ;)

Scott

ALL From_NJ wrote:
> Hey team,
>
> This is buggin me a little tonight and figured I would 'ask the experts' ...
> buggin me especially with the recent emails about the latest v4 lab.
>
> I believe a core technology is defined as one that affects all others, or
> one that must be set up first. In other words, this technology must be
> working before we can attempt other configs. Example:
>
> Routing and route filtering. Obviously routing is core, and the filtering
> might be considered a non-core tech.
>
> Now ... question related to new topic. If all of these are non-core, can we
> assume nothing else depends on them? Example might be MPLS and route
> filtering or tagging at remote ends. You cannot tag at remote ends if the
> routes were not received.
>
> Team - I want to make sure my time is spent wisely and accordingly to the
> core / non-core.
>
> OER / PFR has me worried a little as this can affect routing ... and we know
> all the problems that can / will occur when routing changes on us. The zone
> based fw thing seems like a non-core tech ... hopefully only worth 0.25
> points (wishful thinking).
>
> Anthony, I think you are the one with the expanded blueprint. Is your
> 'expanded blueprint' organized in core / non-core format?
>
> Lastly, with no switches in the tshooting section, can we assume there would
> be additional switching stuff in the config section? I know about
> assumptions ... forgive the way I ask this question please.

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Wed Oct 21 2009 - 22:25:46 ART