RE: Core technology definition / more switching

I was thinking that you were having some sexual feelings for Odie last night :)

-----Original Message-----
From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of ALL From_NJ
Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 10:31 PM
To: smorris_at_ine.com
Cc: Cisco certification; Anthony Sequeira
Subject: Re: Core technology definition / more switching

I actually have not found any sexy topics yet on any blueprint ... ;-)

Agreed. However ... we were told that the new topics are not core. What
does this mean? Humm ...

Concerning OER, I have basically come to the conclusion (after trying to
learn it) that is very extensive in it's configs / option s and that it will
either be presented in one of these two formats:

1) will be fully configured but not working in the tshooting section
or
2) will be in the config section but will not be active ... just a config
exercise that the grading script will check you for.

Your thoughts?

Andrew

On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 10:25 PM, Scott Morris <smorris_at_ine.com> wrote:

> 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.
> >
> >
>

--
Andrew Lee Lissitz
all.from.nj_at_gmail.com
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net