Re: What about the troubleshooting part - allowed commands

No worries Tyson, i do that too without realizing.

On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 9:44 AM, Brad Ellis <brad_at_ccbootcamp.com> wrote:

> I think he's referring to an "old wives tale" about when the CCIE lab
> first came out - it was rumored that Cisco had a special IOS running
> which disabled the equivalent of a show run. It was just rumors, but
> funny, nonetheless.
>
> thanks,
> Brad Ellis
> CCIE#5796 (R&S / Security)
> CCSI# 30482
> CEO / President
> CCBOOTCAMP - Cisco Learning Solutions Partner (CLSP)
> Email: brad_at_ccbootcamp.com
> Toll Free: 877-654-2243
> International: +1-702-968-5100
> Skype: skype:ccbootcamp?call
> FAX: +1-702-446-8012
> YES! We take Cisco Learning Credits!
> Training And Remote Racks: http://www.ccbootcamp.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> Dan Shechter
> Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2010 9:35 AM
> To: CCIE-Newbie
> Cc: Cisco certification
> Subject: Re: What about the troubleshooting part - allowed commands
>
> Hi Dennis,
>
> I have never heard of such a restriction.
>
> A good trouble-shooting technique is always a combination of "show run"
> commands, and other show and debug commands.
>
> For example: sometimes its so much easier to troubleshoot by comparing
> configurations of two routers.
>
> There are even some TS tasks which you just can't use show commands to
> solve, as they can't be tested in the lab, such as some IP services,
> some
> QoS tasks... etc.
>
> At the end, you will always need the "show run" command to verify that
> the
> fix you want to apply to the running configuration actually makes sense.
>
> Note: never use just "show run". You always need to be more specific,
> like
> "show run | section eigrp". To be more specific, you will need the other
> show commands.
>
> Last, but not least, make sure you practice TS labs only after you have
> finished all other practice labs. You will really need all your skills
> to do
> TS.
>
> HTH,
> Dan #13685 (RS/Sec/SP)
> Troubleshooting blog: http://dans-net.com
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 4:04 PM, andy thomas <thomasandy32_at_gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hello
> >
> > Diagram:
> > ISP-1
> ISP-1
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > CORE-1-------------CORE-2
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > PE-2
> PE-1
> > 10.28.40.41/29 | |
> > 10.28.40.33/29
> > |
> |
> > .42 |
> |
> > .34
> > firewall-2
> > firewall-1
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> >
> > ----------------------------------
> > |
> > WEB SERVER
> (10.10.10.1)
> >
> > I want to route traffic to web server I'm using static routes pointing
> to a
> > respective next-hop on a particular router,the devices on customer end
> > firewall is ASA, customer has asked for the preferred interface from
> > firewall-1, i have configured that by increasing the local preference
> of
> > the
> > route
> >
> > The link between the distribution switches and the core is MPLS and
> the
> > customer is configured in the VRF.
> >
> > Now the issue is:
> >
> > customer says that when the firewall-1 fails firewall-2 will be
> active by
> > the same inside interface IP of firewall-1, if it so then all the
> traffic
> > destined to web server from PE-2 to a next-hop 10.28.40.42 will
> drop,so in
> > this situation what techniques we shld apply,The subnet between the 2
> > firewall are different.
> >
> >
> > Any link or configuration example which will help me.
> > Thanks
> >
> >
> > Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________________________________
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> 2010/1/10 Nicolas Leiva <nicolasleiva_at_gmail.com>
>
> > Hey Guys, was working on the free troubleshooting lab you posted and I
> > realized of two minor details.
> >
> > 1. BB3's initial config has a typo:
> >
> > router bgp 9116
> > bgp rouer-id 9.9.3.3
> >
> > 2. R5's interfaces are upside down on the diagram. F0/0 should be
> where
> > F0/1 is and vice versa.
> >
> >
> > That's it, just wanted to let you know...it's the least I can do..
> >
> > Keep up the excellent work
> >
> > Nicolas
> > http://ccie-en-espanol.blogspot.com/
> >
>
>
> Best regards,
> Dan #13685 (RS/Sec/SP)
> Troubleshooting blog: http://dans-net.com
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 4:04 PM, andy thomas <thomasandy32_at_gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hello
> >
> > Diagram:
> > ISP-1
> ISP-1
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > CORE-1-------------CORE-2
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > PE-2
> PE-1
> > 10.28.40.41/29 | |
> > 10.28.40.33/29
> > |
> |
> > .42 |
> |
> > .34
> > firewall-2
> > firewall-1
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> >
> > ----------------------------------
> > |
> > WEB SERVER
> (10.10.10.1)
> >
> > I want to route traffic to web server I'm using static routes pointing
> to a
> > respective next-hop on a particular router,the devices on customer end
> > firewall is ASA, customer has asked for the preferred interface from
> > firewall-1, i have configured that by increasing the local preference
> of
> > the
> > route
> >
> > The link between the distribution switches and the core is MPLS and
> the
> > customer is configured in the VRF.
> >
> > Now the issue is:
> >
> > customer says that when the firewall-1 fails firewall-2 will be
> active by
> > the same inside interface IP of firewall-1, if it so then all the
> traffic
> > destined to web server from PE-2 to a next-hop 10.28.40.42 will
> drop,so in
> > this situation what techniques we shld apply,The subnet between the 2
> > firewall are different.
> >
> >
> > Any link or configuration example which will help me.
> > Thanks
> >
> >
> > Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________________________________
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> 2010/1/10 Nicolas Leiva <nicolasleiva_at_gmail.com>
>
> > Hey Guys, was working on the free troubleshooting lab you posted and I
> > realized of two minor details.
> >
> > 1. BB3's initial config has a typo:
> >
> > router bgp 9116
> > bgp rouer-id 9.9.3.3
> >
> > 2. R5's interfaces are upside down on the diagram. F0/0 should be
> where
> > F0/1 is and vice versa.
> >
> >
> > That's it, just wanted to let you know...it's the least I can do..
> >
> > Keep up the excellent work
> >
> > Nicolas
> > http://ccie-en-espanol.blogspot.com/
> >
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 10:31 AM, CCIE-Newbie <ccie_ka_at_gmx.de> wrote:
>
> > Hi group,
> >
> > currently I'm playing around with troubleshooting labs.
> > Please can anyone tell me if can do a "show run" or just like "show
> run
> > int x/y " ??
> >
> > I heard it is not allowed in the troubleshooting section to do this
> > commands !!
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Dennis
> >
> >
> > 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
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

-- 
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.net