Best of luck
Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone provided by mobily
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2010 10:17:25
To: <[email protected]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
Subject: CCIE_RS Digest, Vol 58, Issue 34
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. CCIE Lab Date (Cedric King)
2. Re: CCIE Lab Date (Marko Milivojevic)
3. Re: Fwd: Vol1 Lab18 (Tyson Scott)
4. Vol3 Lab10 Task1.1 (Jay Taylor)
5. Fwd: Vol1 Lab18 (Jay Taylor)
6. Fwd: Vol1 Lab18 Task6d (Jay Taylor)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2010 00:33:55 -0800 (PST)
From: Cedric King <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: [OSL | CCIE_RS] CCIE Lab Date
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hi All,
Just?wanted to let you guys know?that I have my Lab date scheduled for 14 Dec
in?Dubai and after taking a class in London with Marko, one of?our fellow
classmates went on to get his number?and now I'm gonna make my first attempt.
For those who have tried this... How do you calm your nerves?
v/r
?
CEDRIC KING (TAN COMMS LEAD)
CCNP,CCDP,CCIP,Security+,ITILv3,Project+
?
Afghanistan Engineer District-USACE
Qalaa House Compound, Kabul Afghanistan
Comm: (540) 722-6853
DSN: 312-265-6853
Mobile: 079-546-2536
After hours: (540)542-1593
[email protected]
[email protected]
" Don't judge those who try and fail, judge those who fail to try."
-Author Unknown-
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </archives/ccie_rs/attachments/20101113/251058e7/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2010 04:47:38 -0500
From: Marko Milivojevic <[email protected]>
To: Cedric King <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] CCIE Lab Date
Message-ID:
<[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Good luck on your attempt, Cedric! I'm really looking forward to
hearing your digits.
Just relax, take it easy. You are an expert, experts are not nervous
when they need to perform. That's how you calm your nerves!
--
Marko Milivojevic - CCIE #18427
Senior Technical Instructor - IPexpert
FREE CCIE training: http://bit.ly/vLecture
Mailto: [email protected]
Telephone: +1.810.326.1444
Web: http://www.ipexpert.com/
On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 03:33, Cedric King <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Just?wanted to let you guys know?that I have my Lab date scheduled for 14
> Dec in?Dubai and after taking a class in London with Marko, one of?our
> fellow classmates went on to get his number?and now I'm gonna make my first
> attempt.
>
> For those who have tried this... How do you calm your nerves?
>
> v/r
>
>
> CEDRIC KING (TAN COMMS LEAD)
> CCNP,CCDP,CCIP,Security+,ITILv3,Project+
>
>
>
> Afghanistan Engineer District-USACE
> Qalaa House Compound, Kabul Afghanistan
> Comm: (540) 722-6853
> DSN: 312-265-6853
> Mobile: 079-546-2536
> After hours: (540)542-1593
> [email protected]
> [email protected]
>
> " Don't judge those who try and fail, judge those who fail to try."
> -Author Unknown-
>
> _______________________________________________
> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please
> visit www.ipexpert.com
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2010 09:15:48 -0500
From: "Tyson Scott" <[email protected]>
To: "'Nitin Kumar'" <[email protected]>, "'CCIE OSL'"
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Fwd: Vol1 Lab18
Message-ID: <00b101cb833d$48ba6550$da2f2f...@com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
That is how it maps based on L2.
Regards,
Tyson Scott - CCIE #13513 R&S, Security, and SP
Managing Partner / Sr. Instructor - IPexpert, Inc.
Mailto: [email protected]
Telephone: +1.810.326.1444, ext. 208
Live Assistance, Please visit: www.ipexpert.com/chat
eFax: +1.810.454.0130
IPexpert is a premier provider of Self-Study Workbooks, Video on Demand,
Audio Tools, Online Hardware Rental and Classroom Training for the Cisco
CCIE (R&S, Voice, Security & Service Provider) certification(s) with
training locations throughout the United States, Europe, South Asia and
Australia. Be sure to visit our online communities at
www.ipexpert.com/communities and our public website at www.ipexpert.com
<http://www.ipexpert.com/>
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Nitin Kumar
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 7:36 PM
To: CCIE OSL
Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Fwd: Vol1 Lab18
This question is out of context, but need expert advice.
I have two routers connected on point-point link (encap hdlc)
(R1)10.20.1.5 ----- 10.20.1.6 (R2)
When i ping 10.20.1.5 from R1 (Self interface ) i get RTD 180
When i ping 10.20.1.6 from R2 (remote ip) i get RTD 90
and vice versa from R2...Any idea why is it so as i was under impression
that when you ping your own IP on WAN interface it still goes all across WAN
and come back just like you ping your remote IP/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </archives/ccie_rs/attachments/20101113/be11426d/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2010 10:16:36 -0500
From: Jay Taylor <[email protected]>
To: CCIE OSL <[email protected]>
Subject: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Vol3 Lab10 Task1.1
Message-ID:
<[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
When making the corrections in task1.1 some of the routers have dot1q
configured and others do not. Should we be making the switch configuration
based on what the router config to make it work or modify both to match the
IPv4 address table at the beginning of the lab?
Example: R7 and R9 are configured for dot1q but the address table lacks the
subinterfaces.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </archives/ccie_rs/attachments/20101113/597263b2/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2010 10:17:01 -0500
From: Jay Taylor <[email protected]>
To: CCIE OSL <[email protected]>
Subject: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Fwd: Vol1 Lab18
Message-ID:
<[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Jay Taylor <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 7:01 PM
Subject: Fwd: Vol1 Lab18
To: CCIE OSL <[email protected]>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Jay Taylor <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 8:59 PM
Subject: Vol1 Lab18
To: CCIE OSL <[email protected]>
For Vol1 Lab18 Task18.6c would using 'ip verify unicast source reachable-via
rx' on the eBGP peer interfaces be an acceptable answer? Curious why the DSG
goes through the trouble of creating several lines of ACL's rather than just
1 interface command unless it's just to show another potential way of
handling the task.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </archives/ccie_rs/attachments/20101113/90fc5c3d/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2010 10:17:23 -0500
From: Jay Taylor <[email protected]>
To: CCIE OSL <[email protected]>
Subject: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Fwd: Vol1 Lab18 Task6d
Message-ID:
<[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Jay Taylor <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 7:01 PM
Subject: Fwd: Vol1 Lab18 Task6d
To: [email protected]
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Jay Taylor <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 9:10 PM
Subject: Vol1 Lab18 Task6d
To: CCIE OSL <[email protected]>
In Vol1 Lab18 Task6d the wording of the task makes me think the ACL in the
DSG wouldn't really meet the requirements of the last 2 sentences. I read
that as only allow things destined to the subnets R9 announces; deny and log
everything else. Would this ACL be more fitting based on the wording?
R9(config-ext-nacl)#do sh run | s access
ip access-list extended RFC1918
deny ip 10.0.0.0 0.255.255.255 any log
deny ip 172.16.0.0 0.15.255.255 any log
deny ip 127.0.0.0 0.255.255.255 any log
deny ip 192.168.0.0 0.0.255.255 any log
deny ip 169.254.0.0 0.0.255.255 any log
permit ip any host 200.0.0.9
permit ip any 150.50.69.0 0.0.0.255
deny ip any any log
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </archives/ccie_rs/attachments/20101113/70a40aa1/attachment.html>
End of CCIE_RS Digest, Vol 58, Issue 34
***************************************
_______________________________________________
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit
www.ipexpert.com
