OK, I had these problems and sorted them out. The catalyst are not configured properly from the start. They are missing loopback addresses (thats why it asks for router id) and some of the ports are not in "no switchport" state i.e. they are not routing and they are in vlan 1, hence you get the flapping. I spent a few hours sorting all the errors out, burt once I reliased it, the labs worked fine. Still, its a ppain the the butt having to troubleshoot the startup config when you are pushed for time!
Regards. -------------------------------------------------- From: <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 7:33 AM To: <[email protected]> Subject: CCIE_RS Digest, Vol 43, Issue 139 > Send CCIE_RS mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [email protected] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [email protected] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of CCIE_RS digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Errors in Ver10 Lab 29 Config tasks (Adrian Brayton) > 2. Ver10 Lab 10, section 10.14 (Angel Ramirez-Tejeda) > 3. Re: Errors in Ver10 Lab 29 Config tasks (jmangawang) > 4. Re: Ver10 Lab 10, section 10.14 (Adrian Brayton) > 5. Re: Ver10 Lab 10, section 10.14 (Angel Ramirez-Tejeda) > 6. Re: Errors in Ver10 Lab 29 Config tasks (jmangawang) > 7. Re: Soft or Hard? (desmond Black) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 12:20:24 -0400 > From: Adrian Brayton <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Errors in Ver10 Lab 29 Config tasks > To: Wayne Lawson <[email protected]> > Cc: jmangawang <[email protected]>, CCIE OSL > <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252; format=flowed; > delsp=yes > > Hi, > I was taking a look at a few of the issue's that you had and feel that > this can be done, but I haven't seen the PG to see how they solved it... > > Let me give a few examples: > > 1. The area ID can be an IP address so "area 49.002.0.0" is a valid > area in OSPF. The area's are a 32 bit number as is. I added the last 2 > zero's but that would be a question for the proctor. > > 2. The system ID can be added in HEX: > Router(config-router)#domain-id type ? > 0005 Type 0x0005 > 0105 Type 0x0105 > 0205 Type 0x0205 > 8005 Type 0x8005 > > And the rest I cant help you with... HTHs a bit! > > -Adrian > > > > On Aug 23, 2009, at 11:14 AM, Wayne Lawson wrote: > >> Actually - I've asked Joe to take a look at this post to ensure that >> it's definity an error. If so, it will be corrected. >> >> Regards, >> >> Wayne A. Lawson II - CCIE #5244 >> Founder & President - IPexpert, Inc. >> Mailto: [email protected] >> Mobile: +1.810.334.1564 >> >> :: Message sent from iPhone. >> >> On Aug 23, 2009, at 11:05 AM, Rick Mur <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Thank you for finding these errors. >>> Please contact [email protected] so our people can take a loot at >>> it and take care of these in a future release. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Regards, >>> >>> Rick Mur >>> CCIE2 #21946 (R&S / Service Provider) >>> Sr. Support Engineer ? IPexpert, Inc. >>> URL: http://www.IPexpert.com >>> >>> On 23 aug 2009, at 15:49, jmangawang wrote: >>> >>>> Came across a couple of items while doing this lab that I found to >>>> be >>>> very frustrating or confusing. >>>> >>>> 29.2 - Asked to configure system ID in hex and also to use a bad >>>> OSPF >>>> area value (also contradicts first task). PG addresses neither of >>>> these. >>>> 29.6 through 29.9 - None of these tasks state that the final >>>> objective >>>> of the exercise is so that the VPNs should contain the route of the >>>> other VPNs. At least add something that says R7 should be able to >>>> ping R4s loopback. I made it through the lab exactly as printed >>>> only >>>> to find out that the PG wanted connectivity between R4 and R7. It >>>> kind of goes against my mentality of only do what I am told to do. >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, >>>> please visit www.ipexpert.com >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, >>> please visit www.ipexpert.com >> _______________________________________________ >> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, >> please visit www.ipexpert.com > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 12:52:05 -0400 > From: Angel Ramirez-Tejeda <[email protected]> > Subject: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Ver10 Lab 10, section 10.14 > To: [email protected], [email protected] > Message-ID: > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Dear IP Expert Team, > > I'm using one of your racks for this lab. When configuring OSPF on the > catalysts where every single network must belong to area 0, I cannot > create > a neighbor relationship between them, I can do it between R8 and Cat 1, > but > not between Cat1,Cat2,Cat3,Cat4, as soon as I configure the Ospf process > id, > inmediately the switches ask for router-id, so ok, I configured it, but > then > an permanent error appears: > > %SW_MATM-4-MACFLAP_NOTIF: Host 0012.01a6.2f00 in vlan 1 is flapping > between > port Fa0/23 and port Fa0/19. Also when I type show ip ospf int, nothing > appears. Maybe I'm missing something straightforward here or just need to > eat something. Thanks. > > > Angel. > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://onlinestudylist.com/pipermail/ccie_rs/attachments/20090823/9ef5c59c/attachment-0001.htm > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 12:04:34 -0500 > From: jmangawang <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Errors in Ver10 Lab 29 Config tasks > To: Adrian Brayton <[email protected]> > Cc: CCIE OSL <[email protected]> > Message-ID: > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Thanks, although I think your explanation of item 1 is a little bit of > stretch. There's a huge difference between 49.0002 and 49.002.0.0 or > any other combination you can come up with by adding decimal points. > Whether it's a typo or not, it still contradicts the initial statement > which said to put everything in area 0. > > For Item 2, I believe the domain-id option is used to preserve OSPF > LSA types for prefixes as they are carried over an MP-BGP network. As > far as I understand it, it's used on PE routers facing CE routers > running OSPF. When you redistribute the vrf VPN into MP-BGP, it adds > some extra info in the form of an extended community so that when it > gets to the other side, the remote CE OSPF router will see those > prefixes as O, IA, or external routes. Normally, you'd just get all > external routes because of the redistribution into/from BGP. > > Anybody, please correct me if I'm wrong about the domain-id thing. > > On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Adrian Brayton<[email protected]> > wrote: >> Hi, >> I was taking a look at a few of the issue's that you had and feel that >> this >> can be done, but I haven't seen the PG to see how they solved it... >> >> Let me give a few examples: >> >> 1. The area ID can be an IP address so "area 49.002.0.0" is a valid area >> in >> OSPF. The area's are a 32 bit number as is. I added the last 2 zero's but >> that would be a question for the proctor. >> >> 2. The system ID can be added in HEX: >> ? ? ? ?Router(config-router)#domain-id type ? >> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 0005 Type 0x0005 >> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 0105 Type 0x0105 >> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 0205 Type 0x0205 >> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 8005 Type 0x8005 >> >> And the rest I cant help you with... HTHs a bit! >> >> -Adrian >> > > >>>> On 23 aug 2009, at 15:49, jmangawang wrote: >>>> >>>>> Came across a couple of items while doing this lab that I found to be >>>>> very frustrating or confusing. >>>>> >>>>> 29.2 - Asked to configure system ID in hex and also to use a bad OSPF >>>>> area value (also contradicts first task). ?PG addresses neither of >>>>> these. >>>>> 29.6 through 29.9 - None of these tasks state that the final >>>>> objective >>>>> of the exercise is so that the VPNs should contain the route of the >>>>> other VPNs. ?At least add something that says R7 should be able to >>>>> ping R4s loopback. ?I made it through the lab exactly as printed only >>>>> to find out that the PG wanted connectivity between R4 and R7. ?It >>>>> kind of goes against my mentality of only do what I am told to do. >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, >>>>> please visit www.ipexpert.com >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, >>>> please visit www.ipexpert.com >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, >>> please >>> visit www.ipexpert.com >> >> > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 13:07:07 -0400 > From: Adrian Brayton <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Ver10 Lab 10, section 10.14 > To: Angel Ramirez-Tejeda <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected], [email protected] > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes > > Hey Angel, > I am working on multicast so I have to make it quick... > > The reason that it will ask for OSPF process ID is that you dont have > an IP address on the device. > > The flapping I am not sure but are those trunking links maybe? > > > On Aug 23, 2009, at 12:52 PM, Angel Ramirez-Tejeda wrote: > >> Dear IP Expert Team, >> >> I'm using one of your racks for this lab. When configuring OSPF on >> the catalysts where every single network must belong to area 0, I >> cannot create a neighbor relationship between them, I can do it >> between R8 and Cat 1, but not between Cat1,Cat2,Cat3,Cat4, as soon >> as I configure the Ospf process id, inmediately the switches ask for >> router-id, so ok, I configured it, but then an permanent error >> appears: >> >> %SW_MATM-4-MACFLAP_NOTIF: Host 0012.01a6.2f00 in vlan 1 is flapping >> between port Fa0/23 and port Fa0/19. Also when I type show ip ospf >> int, nothing appears. Maybe I'm missing something straightforward >> here or just need to eat something. Thanks. >> >> >> Angel. >> _______________________________________________ >> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, >> please visit www.ipexpert.com > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 13:15:11 -0400 > From: Angel Ramirez-Tejeda <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Ver10 Lab 10, section 10.14 > To: Adrian Brayton <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected], [email protected] > Message-ID: > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > You're right Adrian, when I compared the configs I realized the ip > addresses > were missing. I took a look at the final configs and the ip addresses must > be configured on the truking ports. The alarm also disappeared. Thanks!!!! > > Angel. > > On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Adrian Brayton <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Hey Angel, >> I am working on multicast so I have to make it quick... >> >> The reason that it will ask for OSPF process ID is that you dont have an >> IP >> address on the device. >> >> The flapping I am not sure but are those trunking links maybe? >> >> >> >> On Aug 23, 2009, at 12:52 PM, Angel Ramirez-Tejeda wrote: >> >> Dear IP Expert Team, >>> >>> I'm using one of your racks for this lab. When configuring OSPF on the >>> catalysts where every single network must belong to area 0, I cannot >>> create >>> a neighbor relationship between them, I can do it between R8 and Cat 1, >>> but >>> not between Cat1,Cat2,Cat3,Cat4, as soon as I configure the Ospf process >>> id, >>> inmediately the switches ask for router-id, so ok, I configured it, but >>> then >>> an permanent error appears: >>> >>> %SW_MATM-4-MACFLAP_NOTIF: Host 0012.01a6.2f00 in vlan 1 is flapping >>> between port Fa0/23 and port Fa0/19. Also when I type show ip ospf int, >>> nothing appears. Maybe I'm missing something straightforward here or >>> just >>> need to eat something. Thanks. >>> >>> >>> Angel. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, >>> please >>> visit www.ipexpert.com >>> >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://onlinestudylist.com/pipermail/ccie_rs/attachments/20090823/1f74c057/attachment-0001.htm > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 12:32:36 -0500 > From: jmangawang <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Errors in Ver10 Lab 29 Config tasks > To: Adrian Brayton <[email protected]> > Cc: CCIE OSL <[email protected]> > Message-ID: > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > I stand corrected. I just tried this out and by default, when I > redistributed OSPF into MP-BGP, it automatically added a domain-id > type of 0x0005 and a value which is somehow related to the process ID > for OSPF. With both process ID's being 2 (router ospf 2 vrf VPNA), I > get the following output: > > R5(config-subif)#do sh ip bgp vpn all 200.0.0.1 > BGP routing table entry for 256:1:200.0.0.1/32, version 25 > Paths: (1 available, best #1, table VPNA) > Advertised to update-groups: > 1 > Local > 150.50.15.1 from 0.0.0.0 (200.0.0.5) > Origin incomplete, metric 2, localpref 100, weight 32768, valid, > sourced, best > Extended Community: RT:256:1 OSPF DOMAIN > ID:0x0005:0x000000020200 <<<------- > OSPF RT:0.0.0.0:2:0 OSPF ROUTER ID:150.50.15.5:512, > mpls labels in/out 24/nolabel > R5(config-subif)#do sh ip bgp vpn all 200.0.0.4 > BGP routing table entry for 256:1:200.0.0.4/32, version 34 > Paths: (1 available, best #1, table VPNA) > Flag: 0xA20 > Not advertised to any peer > Local > 200.0.0.2 (metric 65) from 200.0.0.2 (200.0.0.2) > Origin incomplete, metric 65, localpref 100, valid, internal, best > Extended Community: RT:256:1 OSPF DOMAIN > ID:0x0005:0x000000020200 <<<------- > OSPF RT:0.0.0.0:2:0 OSPF ROUTER ID:150.50.24.2:512, > mpls labels in/out nolabel/21 > > The CE routers route tables shows each route as an internal OSPF route. > But if I change one of the routers so that the process ID is now 3, I > get the following output: > > R5(config-subif)#do sh ip bgp vpn all 200.0.0.4 > BGP routing table entry for 256:1:200.0.0.4/32, version 33 > Paths: (1 available, best #1, table VPNA) > Flag: 0x820 > Not advertised to any peer > Local > 200.0.0.2 (metric 65) from 200.0.0.2 (200.0.0.2) > Origin incomplete, metric 65, localpref 100, valid, internal, best > Extended Community: RT:256:1 OSPF DOMAIN > ID:0x0005:0x000000030200 <<<------- > OSPF RT:0.0.0.0:2:0 OSPF ROUTER ID:150.50.24.2:512, > mpls labels in/out nolabel/21 > > The route table on the CE router shows this route as an external route. >>From the router where I have OSPF process ID 3, I can then enter the >>command: > > router ospf 3 > domain-id type 0005 value 000000030200 > > This will re-write the domain ID value making it the same on both ends > and the CE route table again shows the route as an internal OSPF > route. > > BTW, configuring a domain-id on a non-PE router has no apparent effect. > > On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 12:04 PM, jmangawang<[email protected]> wrote: > >> For Item 2, I believe the domain-id option is used to preserve OSPF >> LSA types for prefixes as they are carried over an MP-BGP network. ?As >> far as I understand it, it's used on PE routers facing CE routers >> running OSPF. ?When you redistribute the vrf VPN into MP-BGP, it adds >> some extra info in the form of an extended community so that when it >> gets to the other side, the remote CE OSPF router will see those >> prefixes as O, IA, or external routes. ?Normally, you'd just get all >> external routes because of the redistribution into/from BGP. >> >> Anybody, please correct me if I'm wrong about the domain-id thing. >> > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 00:03:04 -0530 > From: "desmond Black" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Soft or Hard? > To: [email protected] > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" > > Staring/Concentrating on PC is much more harmful to eyes than doing it on > something in real life..... [ ofcourse depending on the situation ;-) ] > Keeping that logic I preffered the basic Books like TCP/IP Routing Vol 1 > & 2, Switching & QOS in hard copy mode for reading them properly for 2-3 > times. Other topics can be covered in Soft-copy on PC. > > Desmond Black, > In Pursuit of CCIE!! > India > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "michael haynes" > To: "Rick Mur" > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Soft or Hard? > Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 09:58:43 -0400 > > If it's available, I like e-book copies for my Kindle.? Otherise, I > prefer hardcopy - I tend to damage softcopy textbooks more than I > like. > > Michael > > On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 5:25 AM, Rick Mur <[email protected]> wrote: > > It's wat you prefer most. When I want to read an entire book I > always go for a soft-copy, but when I only need 1 or 2 chapters > than I read it online on Safari Books Online.? > But as I said it's all about what you like of course. I know > people who can read entire books online :-) > --? > Regards, > > Rick Mur > CCIE2 #21946 (R&S / Service Provider)Juniper JNCIA-ER & > JNCIA-EXMCSA:Messaging, > MCSE > Sr. Support Engineer ? IPexpert, Inc. > URL:?http://www.IPexpert.com > > > On 23 aug 2009, at 11:08, MANNY Omari wrote: > > ? > ? > Hello Dears, > ? > Which method is better for reading books Soft copy or hard > copy? > ? > Best Regards > ? > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > See all the ways you can stay connected?to friends and > family_______________________________________________ > For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab > training, please visit?www.ipexpert.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab > training, please visit www.ipexpert.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, > please visit www.ipexpert.com > > > > > > -- > Be Yourself @ mail.com! > Choose From 200+ Email Addresses > Get a Free Account at www.mail.com! > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://onlinestudylist.com/pipermail/ccie_rs/attachments/20090824/6c8d12ac/attachment.htm > > End of CCIE_RS Digest, Vol 43, Issue 139 > **************************************** > _______________________________________________ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com
