IEOC - Internetwork Expert's Online Community

Welcome to Internetwork Expert's Online Community - IEOC - a place for CCIE and CCENT candidates to connect, share, and learn. Our Online Community features CCIE forums and discussions for all tracks including Routing & Switching, Voice, Security, Service Provider, and Storage. Through these online communities you can discuss your questions with thousands of your peers, hundreds of CCIE's and Internetwork Expert's own team of world renowned CCIE instructors and authors, Brian Dennis - Quintuple CCIE #2210, Scott Morris - Quad CCIE #4713, Brian McGahan – Triple CCIE #8593, Petr Lapukhov - Quad CCIE #16379, Anthony Sequeira - CCIE #15626, Keith Barker - Dual CCIE #6783, and Marvin Greenlee - Triple CCIE #12237.

Search

More Search Options

Page 1 of 1 (9 items)

7.5 Explicit-null needed?

We need explicit null on R5 and R6 I believe because R1 and R4 will pop labels as they send packets to R5 and R6, thus the policy matching EXP will not work. I verified this with show policy-map interface. Or we could use set qos-group. Thoughts?

Posted to IEWB-SP Volume 2 Version 1.0 Lab 5 (Forum) by deadheadblues on 11-05-2009
Re: Task 5.4 and 5.6

Ok I think I got this know. On R8, you were supposed to create an aggregate in BGP (Task 3.3). This aggregate then gets advertised to R9 once the BGP session is up between R5 and R9. This is also why R2 and R9 need send label, because R2 will not have specific routing information for R7/R8 loopbacks. R9 needs to use the BGP label for R5 it gets through

Posted to IEWB-SP Volume 2 Version 1.0 Lab 5 (Forum) by deadheadblues on 11-05-2009
Re: Task 3.5

I agree, I noticed that once I finished section 5. It's important to go back every now and then make sure you didn't mess things up!

Posted to IEWB-SP Volume 2 Version 1.0 Lab 5 (Forum) by deadheadblues on 09-10-2009
Re: 5.7 Why does SG have send-label on R2 and R9 peering?

nm, i didnt see the other post already.

Posted to IEWB-SP Volume 2 Version 1.0 Lab 5 (Forum) by deadheadblues on 09-10-2009
5.7 Why does SG have send-label on R2 and R9 peering?

Hello, Not sure why this is needed. It works without it. Any ideas? Thanks,

Posted to IEWB-SP Volume 2 Version 1.0 Lab 5 (Forum) by deadheadblues on 09-10-2009
Re: Task 5.4 and 5.6

I thought the same thing, I used a different RT for exporting R7 and R8 loopbacks. As follows: R4: ip vrf 100 rd 200:64578 export map EXPORT route-target import 200:65006 route-target import 200:9 ip access-list standard R5 permit 64.1.5.5 ip access-list standard R7R8 permit 64.1.7.7 permit 64.1.8.8 ! route-map EXPORT permit 10 match ip address R5 set

Posted to IEWB-SP Volume 2 Version 1.0 Lab 5 (Forum) by deadheadblues on 09-10-2009
Re: Task 1.6 in Dynamips

Oh, I think I found it. It was in the topologies file, I just missed it.

Posted to IEWB-SP Volume 2 Version 1.0 Lab 1 (Forum) by deadheadblues on 07-31-2009
Task 1.6 in Dynamips

Hello, I am using the dynamips topology provided on the web site. How do I configure the 7200 (named CellModeATM in the .net file) for this lab? Thank you

Posted to IEWB-SP Volume 2 Version 1.0 Lab 1 (Forum) by deadheadblues on 07-31-2009
Re: Task 4.5 (OSPF area range)

It is impossible to do, must be a typo.

Posted to Mock Lab 4 (Forum) by deadheadblues on 02-08-2009

Page 1 of 1 (9 items)


About IEOC \| Terms of Use \| RSS \| Privacy Policy
© 2010 Internetwork Expert, Inc. All Rights Reserved