RE: keeping configuration lines minimal

Thanks for the answer. I have however some specific commands that Ibd like
to clarify. Assume that nothing explicitly prevents or obliges the use of
those commands:

1. bFrame map ip ... broadcastb. I know what for broadcast is for
and that it can be not required. But only to save time Ibd like to put this
every time.

2. bNo frame inverse-arpb: in some situations it will do anything
but can save time later.

3. bip ospf mtu ignoreb : it wonbt hurt and can save time later.

4. bipv6 address FE00::X link-localb, where X is router# : will save
time when testing connectivity.

I understand that use of some commands may leave a perception that candidate
does not understand the technology, but certainly it does not prove that the
candidate is ignorant either. It is only about saving time. I believe that
labs are graded with automated scripts. Do they catch those buselessb
commands ?

From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Anthony Sequeira
Sent: 20-Oct-10 18:54
To: Sergey Matashuk; Cisco certification
Subject: RE: keeping configuration lines minimal

CCIE instructors see the question time and time again - are we penalized for
bover-configurationb in the CCIE lab exam? The answer - bnot typicallyb. Let
us walk through some examples to see exactly what we are talking about here.

First of all, I encourage students to ask two questions when they are about to
bover-configureb something. Question 1 - can this additional configuration I
am about to make actually gain me points (might Cisco be grading for it)?
Question 2 - can this additional configuration I am about to make actually
hurt me (cause point loss)? If the answers are a resounding YES and NO, then
it is definitely a configuration you should consider making.

A simple example would be setting a Layer 2 switch port for a VLAN with:

switchport access vlan 100

Versus:

switchport mode access
switchport access vlan 100

Might Cisco be grading for the specific configuration of DTP mode OFF on the
port, perhaps. So the answer to the first question is YES. Notice, on the
other hand, this configuration should not cost us points in any way, so the
answer to the second question is NO. We see that these questions lead us to
the conclusion...if it can only help us and not hurt us - GO FOR IT!

While many times we are not penalized for over-configuration, remember that we
are always looking for the simple, time-saving, straightforward solution to
the task at hand. I have seen ridiculous amounts of silly over-configuration
from students that do not understand this principle. One example that comes to
mind is the student that is asked to iBGP peer between R1, R2, and R3 using AS
100. The student then takes it upon himself to configure peer groups, loopback
peerings, and router-IDs. All of this is for bgood measureb and absolutely
none of it was required and gained the student any points! In fact, when
asking the second question about the over-configuration causing point-loss,
the answer here might be...byes, it can cause point loss because I am wasting
so much time!b

Let us also remember that the key to solving the CCIE lab exam comes down to
reading very carefully and following explicit instructions versus implicit
instructions that exist in the task. Often times we discover additional
configuration steps that we should take due to implied requirements.

I discuss this issue in greater detail in the following blog post:

http://blog.ine.com/2008/11/12/the-lab-made-me-do-it-%E2%80%93-implicit-versu
s-explicit/b(

________________________________________
From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com [nobody_at_groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of Sergey
Matashuk [matashuk_at_gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2010 5:26 PM
To: Cisco certification
Subject: keeping configuration lines minimal

What guys are you thinking about keeping configuration lines minimal
on a real CCIE lab exam?

I`ve did INE`s mock lab exam some time ago, and i`ve noticed I`ve loos
the points for one of the tasks due to one more route-map entry. The
route-map were used for redistribution tagging, and my solution was to
add explicit permit clause. All the task requirement were solved, just
the route-map MAY had one entry less.

So, I`m wandering will such approach ends loosing points in real lab
exam? Following keeping conf lines minimum principle we can end up for
example "summarizing" network statements at routing protocol config
mode (to permit two or more interfaces by noe network statement), but
I never heard about loosing points for explicitly permiting every
interface running routing protocol with network statement. And I
personaly prefering to add interface to routing protocol with 0.0.0.0
wildcard, just to have more granular control. We can have interfaces
added (eg tunnels) on later tasks, and I don`t want end up
troubleshhoting routing at the end of exam.

Where is a reasonable border betweeing keeping configuration as small
as possible and having some "freedom" to configure things? Should we
been paranoid on configuration lines? Let`s discuss all of your
thoughts.

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Thu Oct 21 2010 - 17:16:04 ART