1) The final configs are redistributing connected routes.  Is the intent of
this lab to provide reachability to ALL IP addresses or just the ones
specified by NETWORK statements?  I didn't redistribute the connected routes
but I still have full reachability between all IP addresses in the NETWORK
statements (i.e. I only used network statements on the networks that the lab
asked for).  I had to use NEXT-HOP-SELF in my neighbour statements in BGP,
but it works.  Does my solution fulfill the requirements?
 
2) The final configs don't address any routing loops.  When I do successive
SHOW IP ROUTES, the results on R5 and R6 don't stay consistent.  When I do
TRACEROUTES there are obvious loops.  I put measures in my solution to avoid
the loops all together and it seems to work fine.  My question is, how do I
know when I should implement loop avoidance during the exam?
 
3) I loaded the final configs as a test and I found 1 problem.  Access-list
1 on R2 allows the even routes and denies the odds.  This is opposite of the
requirements.  The 1st line is "access-list 1 permit 192.1.1.0 0.0.14.0"
when it should be "access-list 1 permit 192.1.0.0 0.0.14.0"
 

Reply via email to