Thank you for your reply. Yes, of course I looked at the Proctor Guide. That's where the solution is given, right?
Perhaps I have an "old" version of the Guide, because I do not see any explanation there. Would you mind sharing that with me? Thank you again. --- On Sat, 6/7/08, Suresh Mishra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: From: Suresh Mishra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] LAB 8 Task 5 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], "OSL CCIE Routing and Switching Lab Exam" <[email protected]> Date: Saturday, June 7, 2008, 4:09 PM Did you look into the proctor guide. There is a very good explanation of this issue. Suresh On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 11:03 PM, Carlos Valero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > Sorry to bother with a "simple question", but I'm having a hard time > understanding the solution to this particular task. > > R1 advertises 10 networks (loopbacks): > > network 192.1.1.0 > network 192.1.2.0 > network 192.1.3.0 > network 192.1.4.0 > network 192.1.5.0 > network 192.1.6.0 > network 192.1.7.0 > network 192.1.8.0 > network 192.1.9.0 > network 192.1.10.0 > > Then we are asked to do the following: > > • Configure R2 to ONLY allow the odd routes advertised by R1 in its routing > table, > these routes are in form of 192.1.1.0, 192.1.3.0, 192.1.5.0, 192.1.7.0, > 192.1.9.0/24 > > That means that .2, .4, .6, .8, & .10 will NOT be advertised. > > 2 issues I see here: > > 1. After the ACL is applied, 192.1.10.0/24 is still being allowed! > Since it is an EVEN network, it should not be! > > 2. Mask 0.0.14.0 matches all ODD networks. That's fine. > > With it, we allow all the ODD networks and of course we deny everything else > (all EVEN networks). > > That's fine. But then, for all these matched networks, we assign a new > distance = 255! > > Setting an administrative distance of 255 means that all RIP suppliers are > by default accepted but their information is not put into the routing table, > correct? > > If that's correct, then all these odd routes should not be put in the > Routing Table. > > Yet they are and they appear with AD = 120. > > Sorry but I don't get it. > > Is that line correct? Or should it be: > > distance 120 150.50.17.1 255.255.255.255 10 > > instead of: > > distance 255 150.50.17.1 255.255.255.255 10 > > Where am I wrong? > > Does this command actually assign an AD to the networks being DENIED in the > ACL? > > That would be the only explanation, although the issue with network > 192.1.10.0/24 still being allowed still troubles me. > > > C. Valero. > > --- > >
