This is better, the format got all messed up, SORRY:
*Task 1*
R1 should be configured to load balance in a ratio of 1:3 for network
10.1.34.0 /24.
*When we see load balancing and ratios we immediately think of offset-list.
Remember that offset-list only affects the advertised distance, and if we
add to the advertised distance the prefix may NOT even meet the Feasibility
Condition. Therefore, the delay value should be manipulated to achieve this
ratio, the following outlines the formula and steps to accomplish this task:
*
*Step one:*
*We should see the vector metric from R1s perspective:*
*On R1*
* *
*R1#Show ip eigrp topology 10.1.34.0 255.255.255.0 *
* *
*IP-EIGRP (AS 300): Topology entry for 10.1.34.0/24***
State is Passive, Query origin flag is 1, 2 Successor(s), FD is 4729856
Routing Descriptor Blocks:
*10.1.13.3 (Virtual-Access2), from 10.1.13.3*, Send flag is 0x0
*Composite metric is (4729856*/2169856), Route is Internal
*Vector metric:*
*Minimum* *bandwidth is 1544 Kbit*
*Total delay is 120000 microseconds*
Reliability is 255/255
Load is 1/255
Minimum MTU is 1500
Hop count is 1
*10.1.14.4 (Virtual-Access3), from 10.1.14.4*, Send flag is 0x0
*Composite metric is (4729856*/2169856), Route is Internal
*Vector metric:*
*Minimum bandwidth is 1544 Kbit*
*Total delay is 120000 microseconds*
Reliability is 255/255
Load is 5/255
Minimum MTU is 1500
Hop count is 1
*(The rest of the output is omitted)*
*Step two:*
*Lets check the routing table of R1 for this prefix:*
*On R1*
* *
*R1#Show ip route 10.1.34.0*
Routing entry for 10.1.34.0/24
Known via "eigrp 300", distance 90, *metric 4729856*, type internal
Redistributing via eigrp 300, eigrp 600
Advertised by eigrp 600
Last update from 10.1.14.4 on Virtual-Access3, 00:06:24 ago
Routing Descriptor Blocks:
*10.1.14.4, from 10.1.14.4*, 00:06:24 ago, *via Virtual-Access3*
*Route metric is 4729856*, *traffic share count is 1*
*Total delay is 120000* microseconds, *minimum bandwidth is 1544 Kbit*
Reliability 255/255, minimum MTU 1500 bytes
Loading 5/255, Hops 1
** 10.1.13.3, from 10.1.13.3*, 00:06:24 ago, *via Virtual-Access2*
*Route metric is 4729856*, *traffic share count is 1*
*Total delay is 120000 microseconds*, *minimum bandwidth is 1544 Kbit*
Reliability 255/255, minimum MTU 1500 bytes
Loading 1/255, Hops 1
*We can see that R1 is performing an equal cost load balancing using a ratio
of 1:1. If we need to change the ratio to 1:3, we should take the composite
metric of one of the links and multiply it by 3. It means that if the
composite metric of R4 is three times as much as the composite metric of R3
then, R1 can do load balancing using a ratio of 1:3:*
*4729856 * 3 = 14189568*
*How do we configure the above composite metric on R4?*
*We know that the formula that Eigrp uses is:*
*Composite value = 256 (BW + DLY)*
*We also know that offset-list will NOT work. Therefore, we must add to the
delay value of the virtual-template on R1. *
*The composite value should equal to 256 multiplied by the result of BW +
Delay + X, where X is what we need to add to the total delay value to get
the desired composite metric value:*
* *
*14189568 = 256 (BW + Delay + X)*
*To calculate the value for the BW.*
*We know that BW is 10,000,000 Kbps divided by the slowest BW along the path
to a given destination, in this case we see that in the output of the Show
ip eigrp topology command the Vector metric* *minimum bandwidth is 1544
Kbit **for 10.1.14.4. Therefore, it will be:*
*10,000,000 / 1544 = 6476.68393 **We should drop the fractions, so the
result is 6476.***
*To calculate the delay value:*
*The delay value = The sum of the delay values of the links along the path
to a given destination divided by 10.*
*The delay value of S0/0.43 interface of R4 is 20,000 PLUS The delay value
of Virtual-template 14 of R1 is 100,000 DIVIDED by 10:*
* *
*100,000 + 20,000 = 120,000 / 10 = 12,000*
*Therefore:*
*The new composite metric The bandwidth*
* **The sum of delays over 10*
* *
*14189568 = 256 (6476 + 12,000 + **X**) *
*OR **The X is the delay*
*value
*
*14189568 = 256 (18,476 + **X**) **that must be added
to the** *
*Total delay *
*This can be resolved by dividing 14,189,568 by 256:*
*14,189,568 / 256 = 55,428 which means:*
*55,428 = 18,476 + **X** **--------** **If this formula is rearranged, we
should see the following:*
*55,428 18,476 = **X** *
* *
*OR*
* *
*36,952 = **X***
*Therefore, if the delay value of R1s virtual-template is RAISED by 36,952,
the resulting composite metric will give us the ratio of 1:3, as follows:*
* *
*In this step we need to add 36,952 to the delay value of the
virtual-template 14 on R1, which means:*
*10,000 + 36,952 = 46,952*
*On R1*
R1(config)#*int virtual-template 14*
R1(config-if)#*Delay 46952*
*But remember that the router will NOT have the second best route in its
routing table unless the Variance command in router configuration mode is
configured:*
*On R1*
R1(config)#*router eigrp 300*
R1(config-router)#*Variance 3*
*To enforce the changes, lets clear the neighbor adjacency and the routing
table:*
*On R1*
*R1#Clear ip eigrp neighbors*
* *
* *
*R1#Clear ip route **
*To verify the configuration:*
* *
*On R1*
* *
* *
*R1#Show ip eigrp topology 10.1.34.0 255.255.255.0*
IP-EIGRP (AS 300): Topology entry for 10.1.34.0/24
State is Passive, Query origin flag is 1, 1 Successor(s), FD is 4729856
Routing Descriptor Blocks:
*10.1.13.3 (Virtual-Access2), from 10.1.13.3*, Send flag is 0x0
Composite metric is (*4729856*/2169856), Route is Internal
Vector metric:
*Minimum bandwidth is 1544 Kbit*
* Total delay is 120000 microseconds*
Reliability is 255/255
Load is 1/255
Minimum MTU is 1500
Hop count is 1
*10.1.14.4 (Virtual-Access3), from 10.1.14.4*, Send flag is 0x0
Composite metric is (*14189568*/2169856), Route is Internal
Vector metric:
*Minimum bandwidth is 1544 Kbit*
*Total* *delay is 489520 microseconds*
Reliability is 255/255
Load is 5/255
Minimum MTU is 1500
Hop count is 1**
*(The rest of the output is omitted)*
* *
*To see the ratios in the routing table of R1:*
* *
* *
*On R1*
*R1#Show ip route 10.1.34.0*
* *
Routing entry for 10.1.34.0/24
Known via "eigrp 300", distance 90, metric 4729856, type internal
Redistributing via eigrp 300, eigrp 600
Advertised by eigrp 600
Last update from 10.1.14.4 on Virtual-Access3, 00:04:42 ago
Routing Descriptor Blocks:
*10.1.14.4, from 10.1.14.4*, 00:04:42 ago, via Virtual-Access3
*Route metric is 14189568, traffic share count is 1*
Total delay is 489520 microseconds, minimum bandwidth is 1544 Kbit
Reliability 255/255, minimum MTU 1500 bytes
Loading 5/255, Hops 1
** 10.1.13.3, from 10.1.13.3*, 00:04:42 ago, via Virtual-Access2
*Route metric is 4729856, traffic share count is 3*
Total delay is 120000 microseconds, minimum bandwidth is 1544 Kbit
Reliability 255/255, minimum MTU 1500 bytes
Loading 1/255, Hops 1
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 8:45 AM, Narbik Kocharians <narbikk_at_gmail.com>wrote:
> *I am sorry for the long explanation, i hope this helps, please excuse
> typos, it's still fresh from the oven:*
>
> *Topology:*
>
> R1 has 2 frame-relay connections, one to R3 and another one to R4
> We are running PPP between R1 and R3, and R1 and R4-------has nothing to do
> with load balancing but this is the topology.
> R3 has a frame-relay connection to R4 (10.1.34.0 /24)
> **
> *Objective:*
> **
> R1 should use a ratio of 1:3 for 10.1.34.0 /24.
>
>
> *Task*
>
>
>
> R1 should be configured to load balance in a ratio of 1:3 for network
> 10.1.34.0 /24.
>
>
>
>
>
> *When we see load balancing and ratios we immediately think of
> offset-list. Remember that offset-list only affects the advertised
distance,
> and if we add to the advertised distance the prefix may NOT even meet the
> Feasibility Condition. Therefore, the delay value should be manipulated to
> achieve this ratio, the following outlines the formula and steps to
> accomplish this task:*
>
>
>
> *Step one:*
>
> *We should see the vector metric from R1s perspective:*
>
>
>
> *On R1*
>
> * *
>
> *R1#Show ip eigrp topology 10.1.34.0 255.255.255.0 *
>
> * *
>
> *IP-EIGRP (AS 300): Topology entry for 10.1.34.0/24***
>
> State is Passive, Query origin flag is 1, 2 Successor(s), FD is 4729856
>
> Routing Descriptor Blocks:
>
> *10.1.13.3 (Virtual-Access2), from 10.1.13.3*, Send flag is 0x0
>
> *Composite metric is (4729856*/2169856), Route is Internal
>
> *Vector metric:*
>
> *Minimum* *bandwidth is 1544 Kbit*
>
> *Total delay is 120000 microseconds*
>
> Reliability is 255/255
>
> Load is 1/255
>
> Minimum MTU is 1500
>
> Hop count is 1
>
> *10.1.14.4 (Virtual-Access3), from 10.1.14.4*, Send flag is 0x0
>
> *Composite metric is (4729856*/2169856), Route is Internal
>
> *Vector metric:*
>
> *Minimum bandwidth is 1544 Kbit*
>
> *Total delay is 120000 microseconds*
>
> Reliability is 255/255
>
> Load is 5/255
>
> Minimum MTU is 1500
>
> Hop count is 1
>
> *(The rest of the output is omitted)*
>
>
>
> *Step two:*
>
> *Lets check the routing table of R1 for this prefix:*
>
>
>
> *On R1*
>
> * *
>
> *R1#Show ip route 10.1.34.0*
>
>
>
> Routing entry for 10.1.34.0/24
>
> Known via "eigrp 300", distance 90, *metric 4729856*, type internal
>
>
>
> Redistributing via eigrp 300, eigrp 600
>
> Advertised by eigrp 600
>
> Last update from 10.1.14.4 on Virtual-Access3, 00:06:24 ago
>
> Routing Descriptor Blocks:
>
> *10.1.14.4, from 10.1.14.4*, 00:06:24 ago, *via Virtual-Access3*
>
> *Route metric is 4729856*, *traffic share count is 1*
>
> *Total delay is 120000* microseconds, *minimum bandwidth is 1544
> Kbit*
>
> Reliability 255/255, minimum MTU 1500 bytes
>
> Loading 5/255, Hops 1
>
> ** 10.1.13.3, from 10.1.13.3*, 00:06:24 ago, *via Virtual-Access2*
>
> *Route metric is 4729856*, *traffic share count is 1*
>
> *Total delay is 120000 microseconds*, *minimum bandwidth is 1544
> Kbit*
>
> Reliability 255/255, minimum MTU 1500 bytes
>
> Loading 1/255, Hops 1
>
>
>
> *We can see that R1 is performing an equal cost load balancing using a
> ratio of 1:1. If we need to change the ratio to 1:3, we should take the
> composite metric of one of the links and multiply it by 3. It means that if
> the composite metric of R4 is three times as much as the composite metric
of
> R3 then, R1 can do load balancing using a ratio of 1:3:*
>
>
>
> *4729856 * 3 = 14189568*
>
>
>
> *How do we configure the above composite metric on R4?*
>
> *We know that the formula that Eigrp uses is:*
>
>
>
> *Composite value = 256 (BW + DLY)*
>
>
>
> *We also know that offset-list will NOT work. Therefore, we must add to
> the delay value of the virtual-template on R1. *
>
> *The composite value should equal to 256 multiplied by the result of BW +
> Delay + X, where X is what we need to add to the total delay value to get
> the desired composite metric value:*
>
> * *
>
> *14189568 = 256 (BW + Delay + X)*
>
>
>
> *To calculate the value for the BW.*
>
> *We know that BW is 10,000,000 Kbps divided by the slowest BW along the
> path to a given destination, in this case we see that in the output of the
> Show ip eigrp topology command the Vector metric* *minimum bandwidth is
> 1544 Kbit **for 10.1.14.4. Therefore, it will be:*
>
>
>
> *10,000,000 / 1544 = 6476.68393 **We should drop the fractions, so the
> result is 6476.***
>
>
>
> *To calculate the delay value:*
>
> *The delay value = The sum of the delay values of the links along the path
> to a given destination divided by 10.*
>
>
>
> *The delay value of S0/0.43 interface of R4 is 20,000 PLUS The delay value
> of Virtual-template 14 of R1 is 100,000 DIVIDED by 10:*
>
>
>
> * *
>
> *100,000 + 20,000 = 120,000 / 10 = 12,000*
>
>
>
> *Therefore:*
>
>
>
> *14189568 = 256 (6476 + 12,000 + **X**) *
>
> *OR ** *
>
> *14189568 = 256 (18,476 + **X**) ** ** *
>
> * *
>
> *This can be resolved by dividing 14,189,568 by 256:*
>
>
>
> *14,189,568 / 256 = 55,428 which means:*
>
>
>
> *55,428 = 18,476 + **X** **--------** **If this formula is rearranged, we
> should see the following:*
>
>
>
> *55,428 18,476 = **X** *
>
> * *
>
> *OR*
>
> * *
>
> *36,952 = **X***
>
>
>
> *Therefore, if the delay value of R1s virtual-template is RAISED by
> 36,952, the resulting composite metric will give us the ratio of 1:3, as
> follows:*
>
> * *
>
> *In this step we need to add 36,952 to the delay value of the
> virtual-template 14 on R1, which means:*
>
>
>
> *10,000 + 36,952 = 46,952*
>
>
>
> *On R1*
>
>
>
> R1(config)#*int virtual-template 14*
>
> R1(config-if)#*Delay 46952*
>
>
>
> *But remember that the router will NOT have the second best route in its
> routing table unless the Variance command in router configuration mode is
> configured:*
>
>
>
> *On R1*
>
>
>
> R1(config)#*router eigrp 300*
>
> R1(config-router)#*Variance 3*
>
>
>
> *To enforce the changes, lets clear the neighbor adjacency and the
> routing table:*
>
>
>
> *On R1*
>
>
>
> *R1#Clear ip eigrp neighbors*
>
> * *
>
> * *
>
> *R1#Clear ip route **
>
>
>
> *To verify the configuration:*
>
> * *
>
> *On R1*
>
> * *
>
> **
>
> *R1#Show ip eigrp topology 10.1.34.0 255.255.255.0*
>
>
>
> IP-EIGRP (AS 300): Topology entry for 10.1.34.0/24
>
> State is Passive, Query origin flag is 1, 1 Successor(s), FD is 4729856
>
> Routing Descriptor Blocks:
>
> *10.1.13.3 (Virtual-Access2), from 10.1.13.3*, Send flag is 0x0
>
> Composite metric is (*4729856*/2169856), Route is Internal
>
> Vector metric:
>
> *Minimum bandwidth is 1544 Kbit*
>
> * Total delay is 120000 microseconds*
>
> Reliability is 255/255
>
> Load is 1/255
>
>
>
> Minimum MTU is 1500
>
> Hop count is 1
>
> *10.1.14.4 (Virtual-Access3), from 10.1.14.4*, Send flag is 0x0
>
> Composite metric is (*14189568*/2169856), Route is Internal
>
> Vector metric:
>
> *Minimum bandwidth is 1544 Kbit*
>
> *Total* *delay is 489520 microseconds*
>
> Reliability is 255/255
>
> Load is 5/255
>
> Minimum MTU is 1500
>
> Hop count is 1**
>
> *(The rest of the output is omitted)*
>
>
>
> * *
>
> *To see the ratios in the routing table of R1:*
>
> **
>
> * *
>
> *On R1*
>
>
>
> *R1#Show ip route 10.1.34.0*
>
> * *
>
> Routing entry for 10.1.34.0/24
>
> Known via "eigrp 300", distance 90, metric 4729856, type internal
>
> Redistributing via eigrp 300, eigrp 600
>
> Advertised by eigrp 600
>
> Last update from 10.1.14.4 on Virtual-Access3, 00:04:42 ago
>
> Routing Descriptor Blocks:
>
> *10.1.14.4, from 10.1.14.4*, 00:04:42 ago, via Virtual-Access3
>
>
>
> *Route metric is 14189568, traffic share count is 1*
>
> Total delay is 489520 microseconds, minimum bandwidth is 1544 Kbit
>
> Reliability 255/255, minimum MTU 1500 bytes
>
> Loading 5/255, Hops 1
>
> ** 10.1.13.3, from 10.1.13.3*, 00:04:42 ago, via Virtual-Access2
>
> *Route metric is 4729856, traffic share count is 3*
>
> Total delay is 120000 microseconds, minimum bandwidth is 1544 Kbit
>
> Reliability 255/255, minimum MTU 1500 bytes
>
> Loading 1/255, Hops 1
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 7:42 AM, <MDevarajan_at_inautix.co.in> wrote:
>
>> Ron/Ravi...
>>
>> As I gone thew the link which you provided.. .. I have doubt here .. How
>> the RATIO is calculated ?? as the per the example per topology.. He used
>> Variance 5 , and now the ration is 80:23 .. How this 80:23 comes into
>> picture.. ??
>>
>> Lets say .. If I want the ratio of 123:35 , then wat will be the
>> VARIANCE .. How can I calculate that ... ???
>>
>> I am sorry .. hitting my brain to understand.. :-) .
>>
>>
>> Help me ....
>>
>> Thanks...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Let's look at an example regarding unequal cost load balancing. Our goal
>> is to perform unequal cost loadbalancing at a ratio of 5:1 between the two
>> paths. R1 has two paths to the 164.1.26.0/24 network in the above
>> topology.
>> Path 1 - R1 > R3 > R2 > VLAN 26
>> Path 2 - R1 > R2 > VLAN 26
>> By default, EIGRP will choose the path with the lowest metric. For this
>> topology, the Point to point link between R1-R3 is 1.536 Mbps, frame-relay
>> link between R2-R3 is 1.28 Mbps and the frame-relay link between R1-R2 is
>> 256Kbps. In this scenario, R1 will choose Path 1 to reach VLAN 26. At this
>> point if we configure the variance of 5, then the traffic will be load
>> balanced between the two paths at a ratio of 80:23 as shown in the output
>> below
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Mohan Kumar Devarajan/Chennai/iNautix_at_iNautix
>> Sent by: nobody_at_groupstudy.com
>> 12/18/2009 08:49 AM
>> Please respond to
>> Mohan Kumar Devarajan/Chennai/iNautix_at_iNautix
>>
>>
>> To
>> Ravi Singh <way2ccie_at_googlemail.com>
>> cc
>> ccielab_at_groupstudy.com, nobody_at_groupstudy.com, ron.wilkerson_at_gmail.com
>> Subject
>> Re: EIGRP Loadsharing
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Ron/Ravi
>>
>>
>> Thanks a lot .. Let me have a look the below link .. and I back to u
>> guys..
>>
>>
>> Cheers!!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Ravi Singh <way2ccie_at_googlemail.com>
>> Sent by: nobody_at_groupstudy.com
>> 12/18/2009 08:43 AM
>> Please respond to
>> Ravi Singh <way2ccie_at_googlemail.com>
>>
>>
>> To
>> Mohan Kumar Devarajan/Chennai/iNautix_at_iNautix
>> cc
>> ccielab_at_groupstudy.com, ron.wilkerson_at_gmail.com
>> Subject
>> Re: EIGRP Loadsharing
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Ron is correct Mohan .. and read this also
>>
>> http://www.ccietalk.com/2008/09/21/eigrp-unequal-cost-load-balancing
>>
>> Ravi
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 1:39 PM, <ron.wilkerson_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > I did actually and if you read a little more about variance, you'll get
>> > your answer.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: MDevarajan_at_inautix.co.in
>> > Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 08:37:09
>> > To: <ron.wilkerson_at_gmail.com>
>> > Cc: <ccielab_at_groupstudy.com>; Fernando Sete Garcia<
>> > fernandosetegarcia_at_uol.com.br>; <nobody_at_groupstudy.com>
>> > Subject: Re: EIGRP Loadsharing
>> >
>> > My question is about ratio . Please read the my msg fully...
>> >
>> >
>> > Thanks ...........
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ron.wilkerson_at_gmail.com
>> > Sent by: nobody_at_groupstudy.com
>> > 12/18/2009 08:27 AM
>> > Please respond to
>> > ron.wilkerson_at_gmail.com
>> >
>> >
>> > To
>> > Mohan Kumar Devarajan/Chennai/iNautix_at_iNautix, "Fernando Sete Garcia"
>> > <fernandosetegarcia_at_uol.com.br>
>> > cc
>> > ccielab_at_groupstudy.com, nobody_at_groupstudy.com
>> > Subject
>> > Re: EIGRP Loadsharing
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Look up the variance command.
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: MDevarajan_at_inautix.co.in
>> > Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 08:22:04
>> > To: Fernando Sete Garcia<fernandosetegarcia_at_uol.com.br>
>> > Cc: <ccielab_at_groupstudy.com>; <nobody_at_groupstudy.com>
>> > Subject: EIGRP Loadsharing
>> >
>> > Lets asume the seniario .
>> >
>> > Router A is having 4 routes in its routing table . The Question says
>> make
>> >
>> > sure the traffic is load shared and balanced between these routes with
>> the
>> >
>> > ratio of 1:3:4:2.
>> >
>> >
>> > How could we accomplish this ???
>> >
>> > Please guide me ..
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Mohan
>> >
>> >
>> > 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
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________________________________
>> > 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
>>
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>> Subscription information may be found at:
>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ******************************************************
>> This message and any files or attachments sent with this message contain
>> confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If
>> you are not the named addressee, you should not disseminate, distribute,
>> copy or use any part of this email. If you have received this message in
>> error, please delete it and all copies from your system and notify the
>> sender immediately by return Email.
>>
>> Email transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as
>> information can be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, late,
>> incomplete or may contain viruses. The sender, therefore, does not accept
>> liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message,
>> which arise as a result of email transmission.
>> ******************************************************
>>
>>
>> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>>
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>> Subscription information may be found at:
>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Narbik Kocharians
> CCSI#30832, CCIE# 12410 (R&S, SP, Security)
> www.MicronicsTraining.com <http://www.micronicstraining.com/>
> Sr. Technical Instructor
> YES! We take Cisco Learning Credits!
> Training And Remote Racks available
>
-- Narbik Kocharians CCSI#30832, CCIE# 12410 (R&S, SP, Security) www.MicronicsTraining.com Sr. Technical Instructor YES! We take Cisco Learning Credits! Training And Remote Racks available Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.netReceived on Fri Dec 18 2009 - 08:48:29 ART
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Sat Jan 02 2010 - 11:11:08 ART