Re: INE SP v3 topology

Thanks Tony.
Going virtual is fine. But in this case we have a luxury of building our
rack or maybe two on company account. I even plan to install some power
rails with web-access. :-)

Cheers,
A.

On 6/10/2014 3:13 PM, Groupstudy wrote:
> Yes, rent time on a rack such as mine. :) cconlinelabs
>
> The cost to stand up your own rack will be quite expensive. Especially for
> the SP track with the XR routers. That is why rack rentals make more sense
> because you can share the cost across many users if you do it right and
> minimize your administrative overhead.
>
> For the INE labs, we have deployed all physical routers because their
> requirement of number of routers is pretty low as you have pointed out. For
> all other labs, the demand for 24 routers has pushed us to deploy some
> virtual routers. The benefit or virtual routers far outweighs the few
> features that are not supported in the virtual environment.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> Alexei Monastyrnyi
> Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2014 5:31 AM
> To: Cisco certification
> Subject: INE SP v3 topology
>
> Hi guys,
> juts a quick one.
> INE post here
>
> http://blog.ine.com/2011/09/02/ines-new-ccie-service-provider-version-3-0-to
> pology-finalized/
>
> suggests 20 routers for SPv3 topology while the online SPv3 workbook on INE
> members site suggests 10, the difference is in 10 extra 2611XM routers.
> I have been tasked to build a lab for my coleagues at SP competence group
> and extra 10 routers makes things a bit different rackspace wise, etc.
>
> Any insights?
>
> Cheers
> A.
>
>
> 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
Received on Wed Jun 11 2014 - 19:08:23 ART