Thanks Jay useful, makes me think I should hold off.... BR
Sent from my iPhone on 3 On 22 Apr 2012, at 19:58, Jay McMickle <[email protected]> wrote: > I googled it and found the link. It's from last Oct., but it was Marko. > http://blog.ipexpert.com/2011/10/11/will-there-be-a-blueprint-change/ > > > > Regards, > Jay McMickle- CCNP, CCSP, CCDP, MCSE > > > > From: Bob McCouch <[email protected]> > To: Tony Singh <[email protected]> > Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2012 12:47 PM > Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] CCIE_RS Digest, Vol 75, Issue 36 > > I'm unaware of any announced changes to the exam, and Cisco's policy > is that before a major change (like 4.0 to 5.0) they will give > "plenty" of warning which is at least 6 months as far as I know. > > Sent from my iPad > > On Apr 22, 2012, at 1:44 PM, Tony Singh <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi guys > > > > A speculative question but I need to know if v4 will become v5 anytime > > soon, reason for asking is I'm planning on buying equipment and training > > materials and do not want to buy old gear. > > > > BR > > > > Tony > > CCNP CCNA R&S > > > > Sent from my iPhone on 3 > > > > On 22 Apr 2012, at 08:20, [email protected] wrote: > > > >> 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: CCIElab lab 5 (Marko Milivojevic) > >> 2. Vol 1 - 29.6 (Joe Danrich) > >> 3. CCIE level Labs (Breland Rogers) > >> 4. VOL. 1 LAB 14.1 a (khaled al-ajeman) > >> 5. Re: VOL. 1 LAB 14.1 a ([email protected]) > >> 6. Re: VOL. 1 LAB 14.1 a (Joe Danrich) > >> 7. Re: Vol 1 - 29.6 (Elie Raad) > >> > >> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > >> Message: 1 > >> Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2012 09:16:00 -0700 > >> From: Marko Milivojevic <[email protected]> > >> To: Jay McMickle <[email protected]> > >> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, ccie > >> onlyone <[email protected]> > >> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] CCIElab lab 5 > >> Message-ID: <[email protected]> > >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > >> > >> Bloody bastard keeps changing email address. We've banned 7 last week. > >> > >> -- > >> Marko Milivojevic - CCIE #18427 > >> > >> :: This message was sent from a mobile device. I apologize for errors and > >> brevity. :: > >> > >> On Apr 21, 2012, at 8:53, Jay McMickle <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >>> How is it that if I post something even with the slightest opinion, Marko > >>> shuts it down, and offline emails me. > >>> > >>> BUT > >>> > >>> This guy stays on the distro. I think Marko needs to pay closer watch an > >>> help us filter these guys out. ;) > >>> > >>> Oh, and I expect this continue, even after Marko emails me a nasty note > >>> from IPX. > >>> > >>> Happy labbing weekend, gents! > >>> > >>> Regards, > >>> Jay McMickle- CCNP,CCSP,CCDP > >>> Sent from iJay > >>> > >>> On Apr 21, 2012, at 7:22 AM, ccie onlyone <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>>> My friend got the new lab, just to get update, add me > >>>> > >>>> regards, > >>>> ccietocome > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, > >>>> please visit www.ipexpert.com > >>>> > >>>> Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out > >>>> www.PlatinumPlacement.com > >>>> > >>>> http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please > >>> visit www.ipexpert.com > >>> > >>> Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out > >>> www.PlatinumPlacement.com > >>> > >>> http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs > >> > >> > >> ------------------------------ > >> > >> Message: 2 > >> Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2012 13:52:47 -0700 > >> From: Joe Danrich <[email protected]> > >> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > >> Subject: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Vol 1 - 29.6 > >> Message-ID: <[email protected]> > >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > >> > >> Okay so in this step it wants you to create two VRF's (VPNA & VPNB) one > >> per a specific router.. > >> > >> It doesn't state anywhere that you are supposed to import each > >> respective route-target into one another. A's rt into B and vice versa. > >> > >> However the results and described solution in the solutions guide, state > >> that each router should import the others route-target? > >> > >> It's contradictory in my mind, that if a step doesn't tell you to do > >> something, you shouldn't do it.. > >> > >> Am I missing something here? > >> > >> V/R > >> > >> Joe > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> ------------------------------ > >> > >> Message: 3 > >> Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2012 21:16:53 -0700 (PDT) > >> From: Breland Rogers <[email protected]> > >> To: IPEXPERT <[email protected]> > >> Subject: [OSL | CCIE_RS] CCIE level Labs > >> Message-ID: > >> <[email protected]> > >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > >> > >> Hello,? > >> > >> Could anyone please share any free GNS3 CCIE level labs that are free. ?Im > >> 21 and on a budget. > >> > >> Thanks.? > >> > >> ------------------------------ > >> > >> Message: 4 > >> Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2012 08:57:33 +0300 > >> From: khaled al-ajeman <[email protected]> > >> To: [email protected] > >> Subject: [OSL | CCIE_RS] VOL. 1 LAB 14.1 a > >> Message-ID: > >> <CACv-o9uinWBPs9=s-kyf1qm5e2ekwrnhu6r7s8kq5+_zcgy...@mail.gmail.com> > >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > >> > >> Hi fellas, > >> > >> I have done my bgp connection right, but still my bgp connection is not up > >> as a matter of fact it is still active. Below are my configuration > >> > >> R2 ------ > hub > >> > >> > >> R2#sr | s bgp > >> router bgp 1 > >> no bgp default ipv4-unicast > >> bgp log-neighbor-changes > >> neighbor peergroup peer-group > >> neighbor peergroup remote-as 1 > >> neighbor peergroup update-source Loopback0 > >> neighbor 200.0.0.1 peer-group peergroup > >> neighbor 200.0.0.5 peer-group peergroup > >> ! > >> address-family ipv4 > >> neighbor peergroup route-reflector-client > >> neighbor peergroup next-hop-self > >> neighbor 200.0.0.1 activate > >> neighbor 200.0.0.5 activate > >> no auto-summary > >> no synchronization > >> exit-address-family > >> ! > >> address-family ipv4 multicast > >> neighbor peergroup route-reflector-client > >> neighbor peergroup next-hop-self > >> neighbor 200.0.0.1 activate > >> neighbor 200.0.0.5 activate > >> no auto-summary > >> no synchronization > >> exit-address-family > >> R2# > >> > >> > >> > >> R1 ----------> spoke > >> > >> R1#sr | s bg > >> router bgp 1 > >> no bgp default ipv4-unicast > >> bgp log-neighbor-changes > >> neighbor 200.0.0.2 remote-as 1 > >> neighbor 200.0.0.2 update-source Loopback0 > >> ! > >> address-family ipv4 > >> neighbor 200.0.0.2 activate > >> no auto-summary > >> no synchronization > >> exit-address-family > >> ! > >> address-family ipv4 multicast > >> neighbor 200.0.0.2 activate > >> no auto-summary > >> no synchronization > >> exit-address-family > >> R1# > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> R5 --------> Spoke > >> > >> > >> R5#sr | s bg > >> router bgp 1 > >> no bgp default ipv4-unicast > >> bgp log-neighbor-changes > >> neighbor 200.0.0.2 remote-as 1 > >> neighbor 200.0.0.2 update-source Loopback0 > >> ! > >> address-family ipv4 > >> neighbor 200.0.0.2 activate > >> no auto-summary > >> no synchronization > >> exit-address-family > >> ! > >> address-family ipv4 multicast > >> neighbor 200.0.0.2 activate > >> no auto-summary > >> no synchronization > >> exit-address-family > >> R5# > >> > >> here is my output from R2: > >> > >> > >> > >> R2#sh ip bgp ipv4 unicast sum > >> BGP router identifier 200.0.0.2, local AS number 1 > >> BGP table version is 1, main routing table version 1 > >> Neighbor V AS MsgRcvd MsgSent TblVer InQ OutQ Up/Down > >> State/PfxRcd > >> 200.0.0.1 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 never > >> Active ---------------> it is > >> suppose to be 0 for both routers R1 AND R5 > >> 200.0.0.5 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 never Active > >> R2#sh ip bgp ipv4 multicast sum > >> BGP router identifier 200.0.0.2, local AS number 1 > >> BGP table version is 1, main routing table version 1 > >> Neighbor V AS MsgRcvd MsgSent TblVer InQ OutQ Up/Down > >> State/PfxRcd > >> 200.0.0.1 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 never Active > >> 200.0.0.5 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 never Active > >> R2# > >> > >> > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> > >> ------------------------------ > >> > >> Message: 5 > >> Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2012 06:42:52 +0000 > >> From: [email protected] > >> To: "khaled al-ajeman" <[email protected]>, > >> [email protected], [email protected] > >> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] VOL. 1 LAB 14.1 a > >> Message-ID: > >> > >> <1993407919-1335076970-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-892677182-@b28.c9.bise7.blackberry> > >> > >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" > >> > >> Hi Khaled, > >> I am not familar with the topology but have u confirmed layer 3 > >> reachability between ur spoke and hub? Sourcing ur icmp pings from your > >> respective loopbacks? > >> Sent from my BlackBerry? smartphone provided by Airtel Nigeria. > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: khaled al-ajeman <[email protected]> > >> Sender: [email protected] > >> Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2012 08:57:33 > >> To: <[email protected]> > >> Subject: [OSL | CCIE_RS] VOL. 1 LAB 14.1 a > >> > >> Hi fellas, > >> > >> I have done my bgp connection right, but still my bgp connection is not up > >> as a matter of fact it is still active. Below are my configuration > >> > >> R2 ------ > hub > >> > >> > >> R2#sr | s bgp > >> router bgp 1 > >> no bgp default ipv4-unicast > >> bgp log-neighbor-changes > >> neighbor peergroup peer-group > >> neighbor peergroup remote-as 1 > >> neighbor peergroup update-source Loopback0 > >> neighbor 200.0.0.1 peer-group peergroup > >> neighbor 200.0.0.5 peer-group peergroup > >> ! > >> address-family ipv4 > >> neighbor peergroup route-reflector-client > >> neighbor peergroup next-hop-self > >> neighbor 200.0.0.1 activate > >> neighbor 200.0.0.5 activate > >> no auto-summary > >> no synchronization > >> exit-address-family > >> ! > >> address-family ipv4 multicast > >> neighbor peergroup route-reflector-client > >> neighbor peergroup next-hop-self > >> neighbor 200.0.0.1 activate > >> neighbor 200.0.0.5 activate > >> no auto-summary > >> no synchronization > >> exit-address-family > >> R2# > >> > >> > >> > >> R1 ----------> spoke > >> > >> R1#sr | s bg > >> router bgp 1 > >> no bgp default ipv4-unicast > >> bgp log-neighbor-changes > >> neighbor 200.0.0.2 remote-as 1 > >> neighbor 200.0.0.2 update-source Loopback0 > >> ! > >> address-family ipv4 > >> neighbor 200.0.0.2 activate > >> no auto-summary > >> no synchronization > >> exit-address-family > >> ! > >> address-family ipv4 multicast > >> neighbor 200.0.0.2 activate > >> no auto-summary > >> no synchronization > >> exit-address-family > >> R1# > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> R5 --------> Spoke > >> > >> > >> R5#sr | s bg > >> router bgp 1 > >> no bgp default ipv4-unicast > >> bgp log-neighbor-changes > >> neighbor 200.0.0.2 remote-as 1 > >> neighbor 200.0.0.2 update-source Loopback0 > >> ! > >> address-family ipv4 > >> neighbor 200.0.0.2 activate > >> no auto-summary > >> no synchronization > >> exit-address-family > >> ! > >> address-family ipv4 multicast > >> neighbor 200.0.0.2 activate > >> no auto-summary > >> no synchronization > >> exit-address-family > >> R5# > >> > >> here is my output from R2: > >> > >> > >> > >> R2#sh ip bgp ipv4 unicast sum > >> BGP router identifier 200.0.0.2, local AS number 1 > >> BGP table version is 1, main routing table version 1 > >> Neighbor V AS MsgRcvd MsgSent TblVer InQ OutQ Up/Down > >> State/PfxRcd > >> 200.0.0.1 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 never > >> Active ---------------> it is > >> suppose to be 0 for both routers R1 AND R5 > >> 200.0.0.5 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 never Active > >> R2#sh ip bgp ipv4 multicast sum > >> BGP router identifier 200.0.0.2, local AS number 1 > >> BGP table version is 1, main routing table version 1 > >> Neighbor V AS MsgRcvd MsgSent TblVer InQ OutQ Up/Down > >> State/PfxRcd > >> 200.0.0.1 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 never Active > >> 200.0.0.5 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 never Active > >> R2# > >> > >> > >> > >> Thanks, > >> _______________________________________________ > >> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please > >> visit www.ipexpert.com > >> > >> Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out > >> www.PlatinumPlacement.com > >> > >> http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs > >> > >> ------------------------------ > >> > >> Message: 6 > >> Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2012 23:55:30 -0700 > >> From: Joe Danrich <[email protected]> > >> To: khaled al-ajeman <[email protected]> > >> Cc: [email protected] > >> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] VOL. 1 LAB 14.1 a > >> Message-ID: <[email protected]> > >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > >> > >> Can you ping from each source BGP Speaker interface to the relevant peer? > >> > >> V/R > >> > >> Joe > >> > >> On 04/21/2012 10:57 PM, khaled al-ajeman wrote: > >>> Hi fellas, > >>> > >>> I have done my bgp connection right, but still my bgp connection is not up > >>> as a matter of fact it is still active. Below are my configuration > >>> > >>> R2 ------> hub > >>> > >>> > >>> R2#sr | s bgp > >>> router bgp 1 > >>> no bgp default ipv4-unicast > >>> bgp log-neighbor-changes > >>> neighbor peergroup peer-group > >>> neighbor peergroup remote-as 1 > >>> neighbor peergroup update-source Loopback0 > >>> neighbor 200.0.0.1 peer-group peergroup > >>> neighbor 200.0.0.5 peer-group peergroup > >>> ! > >>> address-family ipv4 > >>> neighbor peergroup route-reflector-client > >>> neighbor peergroup next-hop-self > >>> neighbor 200.0.0.1 activate > >>> neighbor 200.0.0.5 activate > >>> no auto-summary > >>> no synchronization > >>> exit-address-family > >>> ! > >>> address-family ipv4 multicast > >>> neighbor peergroup route-reflector-client > >>> neighbor peergroup next-hop-self > >>> neighbor 200.0.0.1 activate > >>> neighbor 200.0.0.5 activate > >>> no auto-summary > >>> no synchronization > >>> exit-address-family > >>> R2# > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> R1 ----------> spoke > >>> > >>> R1#sr | s bg > >>> router bgp 1 > >>> no bgp default ipv4-unicast > >>> bgp log-neighbor-changes > >>> neighbor 200.0.0.2 remote-as 1 > >>> neighbor 200.0.0.2 update-source Loopback0 > >>> ! > >>> address-family ipv4 > >>> neighbor 200.0.0.2 activate > >>> no auto-summary > >>> no synchronization > >>> exit-address-family > >>> ! > >>> address-family ipv4 multicast > >>> neighbor 200.0.0.2 activate > >>> no auto-summary > >>> no synchronization > >>> exit-address-family > >>> R1# > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> R5 --------> Spoke > >>> > >>> > >>> R5#sr | s bg > >>> router bgp 1 > >>> no bgp default ipv4-unicast > >>> bgp log-neighbor-changes > >>> neighbor 200.0.0.2 remote-as 1 > >>> neighbor 200.0.0.2 update-source Loopback0 > >>> ! > >>> address-family ipv4 > >>> neighbor 200.0.0.2 activate > >>> no auto-summary > >>> no synchronization > >>> exit-address-family > >>> ! > >>> address-family ipv4 multicast > >>> neighbor 200.0.0.2 activate > >>> no auto-summary > >>> no synchronization > >>> exit-address-family > >>> R5# > >>> > >>> here is my output from R2: > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> R2#sh ip bgp ipv4 unicast sum > >>> BGP router identifier 200.0.0.2, local AS number 1 > >>> BGP table version is 1, main routing table version 1 > >>> Neighbor V AS MsgRcvd MsgSent TblVer InQ OutQ Up/Down > >>> State/PfxRcd > >>> 200.0.0.1 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 never > >>> Active ---------------> it is > >>> suppose to be 0 for both routers R1 AND R5 > >>> 200.0.0.5 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 never Active > >>> R2#sh ip bgp ipv4 multicast sum > >>> BGP router identifier 200.0.0.2, local AS number 1 > >>> BGP table version is 1, main routing table version 1 > >>> Neighbor V AS MsgRcvd MsgSent TblVer InQ OutQ Up/Down > >>> State/PfxRcd > >>> 200.0.0.1 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 never Active > >>> 200.0.0.5 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 never Active > >>> R2# > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please > >>> visit www.ipexpert.com > >>> > >>> Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out > >>> www.PlatinumPlacement.com > >>> > >>> http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs > >> > >> > >> > >> ------------------------------ > >> > >> Message: 7 > >> Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2012 07:20:08 +0000 > >> From: Elie Raad <[email protected]> > >> To: Joe Danrich <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" > >> <[email protected]> > >> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Vol 1 - 29.6 > >> Message-ID: > >> > >> <3840b1aaec7edd4caff9def3ad0131b81b8d7...@amsprd0104mb146.eurprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com> > >> > >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > >> > >> Hello Joe, > >> > >> I did the same as you did , but when i read in 29.9 he said that do not > >> change next-hop addresses of receiving routes from R2 and R8. which mean > >> that he want us to exchange routes coming from R2 and R8 . > >> > >> > >> Best Regards, > >> > >> Elie Raad > >> > >> ________________________________________ > >> From: [email protected] > >> [[email protected]] on behalf of Joe Danrich > >> [[email protected]] > >> Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2012 11:52 PM > >> To: [email protected] > >> Subject: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Vol 1 - 29.6 > >> > >> Okay so in this step it wants you to create two VRF's (VPNA & VPNB) one > >> per a specific router.. > >> > >> It doesn't state anywhere that you are supposed to import each > >> respective route-target into one another. A's rt into B and vice versa. > >> > >> However the results and described solution in the solutions guide, state > >> that each router should import the others route-target? > >> > >> It's contradictory in my mind, that if a step doesn't tell you to do > >> something, you shouldn't do it.. > >> > >> Am I missing something here? > >> > >> V/R > >> > >> Joe > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please > >> visit www.ipexpert.com > >> > >> Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out > >> www.PlatinumPlacement.com > >> > >> http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> End of CCIE_RS Digest, Vol 75, Issue 36 > >> *************************************** > > _______________________________________________ > > For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please > > visit www.ipexpert.com > > > > Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out > > www.PlatinumPlacement.com > > > > http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs > _______________________________________________ > For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please > visit www.ipexpert.com > > Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out > www.PlatinumPlacement.com > > http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs > > _______________________________________________ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs
