Ken- Wow- with that attitude, I would wonder why you would be pursuing such an elite certification. Dumps alone will not get anyone to pass.
Oh, and keep in mind that Darby is bitter due to his multiple failed attempts since 2002. Jus sayin'. Regards, Jay McMickle- CCIE #35355 (R&S) Sent from iJay On May 18, 2012, at 2:00 AM, Thomas Raabo - Zitcom A/S <[email protected]> wrote: > Even mr Cisco Russ White is no more. > > Thomas > > -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- > Fra: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] På vegne af Ken Wyan > Sendt: 18. maj 2012 07:18 > Til: [email protected] > Emne: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] CCIE how to pass the lab (light humour) > > Thanks for sharing. > > This is more or less what's hapenning everywhere. These type of marketing > guys dominate cisco also & those with good practical experience slowly quit > due to these jokers. > > Finally , Cisco products are full of defects. Smallest bugs remain unresolved > for a series of releases. > > On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 7:55 AM, Tony Singh <[email protected]> wrote: > >> This article is good humour, enjoy >> >> http://ccieflyer.com/2010-02-Darby-Weaver-Achilles-Heel.php >> >> BR >> >> Tony >> >> CCNP CCNA R&S JNCIS-SEC MCSE >> >> Sent from my iPhone on 3 >> >> On 17 May 2012, at 17:00, [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: ? (Adam Booth) >>> 2. Re: Interworking in L2VPN (CCIE KID) >>> 3. WB-1 LAB-17 TASK-17.3 (Ren? Huet) >>> >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> -- >>> >>> Message: 1 >>> Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 06:46:35 +1000 >>> From: Adam Booth <[email protected]> >>> To: "Bodnar, Edward" <[email protected]> >>> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >>> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] ? >>> Message-ID: >>> >>> <CAKXsBmpn4KoO45ybp-3=pd31hmpsext-bw28_h1ck2l5ltc...@mail.gmail.com> >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 >>> >>> Hi Edward, >>> >>> The Switch adds these via option 82 to the DHCP packet made by a >>> DHCP client, so the DHCP server can make some decisions as to what >>> to do with that user. Generally Circuit-Id is used to identify the >>> originating >> switch >>> and switch port that the customer is connected to, and the remote-id >>> may >> be >>> a service id/customer id. >>> >>> Depending on your context you could use the Circuit-Id/Remote-Id to >> always >>> allocate a specific IP address to a Switch port regardless as to >>> what the mac address of the client device is. >>> >>> In a situation where the network infrastructure owner is different >>> to the service owner (e.g. a wholesale environment) the >>> infrastructure owner may move ports associated with a customer >>> around - so the wholesale operator >> in >>> a lot of instances is told to rely on using the remote-id and not >>> the circuit-id to identify their client (but knowing the circuit-id >>> may be useful if there is a fault) >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Adam >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 4:25 AM, Bodnar, Edward < >> [email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> Can anybody provide some clarity around these commands. >>>> >>>> Ip dhcp snooping information option format-type ( circuit-id | >> remote-id ) >>>> >>>> >>>> Need info on what they do and why I would use them. >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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://www.platinumplacement.com/> >>>> >>>> http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs >>>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> Message: 2 >>> Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 12:45:36 +0530 >>> From: CCIE KID <[email protected]> >>> To: Mohammad Khalil <[email protected]> >>> Cc: [email protected], [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Interworking in L2VPN >>> Message-ID: >>> >>> <CAJuc+Q9ZzpE48kSd3YE=y2kshay5e5x9ovuhn9gykblhzhk...@mail.gmail.com> >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 >>> >>> Thanks Mohammad, >>> >>> What are the parameters to match when u want to form a Targeted LDP >>> peer between two PE's if u have two different VC Types in them. >>> For example on one side u have Ethernet and on the other side u have FR. >>> What are the parameters to match on both the sides . >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 10:52 AM, Mohammad Khalil >>> <[email protected] >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi , i did a similar setup using xconnect between EThernet and ATM >>>> , please find below (note that TESTING1 is connected to PE1 through >>>> NSP >> and >>>> TESTING2 is connected to PE2) >>>> >>>> TESTING1 >>>> >>>> interface ATM0 >>>> description *** TEC-TEC2 ATM 5/7 *** no ip address no atm >>>> ilmi-keepalive dsl operating-mode ansi-dmt end interface ATM0.1 >>>> point-to-point ip address 172.16.18.98 255.255.255.252 pvc 2/222 >>>> protocol ip 172.16.18.97 broadcast ! >>>> interface ATM0.2 point-to-point >>>> ip address 10.10.10.2 255.255.255.252 pvc 30/30 protocol ip >>>> 10.10.10.1 broadcast >>>> >>>> TESTING2 >>>> >>>> interface FastEthernet0/0 >>>> no ip address >>>> duplex full >>>> speed 100 >>>> interface FastEthernet0/0.94 >>>> encapsulation dot1Q 94 >>>> ip address 10.10.10.2 255.255.255.252 ! >>>> interface FastEthernet0/0.99 >>>> encapsulation dot1Q 99 >>>> ip address 172.16.18.97 255.255.255.252 >>>> >>>> PE1 >>>> >>>> interface GigabitEthernet2/1/0 >>>> mtu 1530 >>>> ip address 62.215.0.49 255.255.255.252 ip ospf network >>>> point-to-point negotiation auto mpls ip end interface ATM2/0/0 >>>> description *** ATM STM-1 Link To 6400-TEC ( ATM3/1/0 ) *** no ip >>>> address load-interval 30 no atm enable-ilmi-trap no atm >>>> ilmi-keepalive pvc 0/5 qsaal ! >>>> pvc 0/16 ilmi >>>> ! >>>> End >>>> interface ATM2/0/0.2020 point-to-point no atm enable-ilmi-trap pvc >>>> 12/195 l2transport encapsulation aal5snap xconnect 62.215.0.222 133 >>>> pw-class inter-ether >>>> >>>> PE2 >>>> >>>> interface GigabitEthernet0/1 >>>> mtu 1530 >>>> ip address 62.215.0.50 255.255.255.252 ip ospf network >>>> point-to-point media-type sfp speed auto duplex auto negotiation >>>> auto mpls ip >>>> >>>> interface GigabitEthernet0/3 >>>> mtu 4470 >>>> no ip address >>>> media-type rj45 >>>> speed auto >>>> duplex full >>>> negotiation auto >>>> end >>>> interface GigabitEthernet0/3.99 >>>> encapsulation dot1Q 99 >>>> xconnect 62.215.0.194 133 pw-class inter-ether >>>> >>>> PE2#sh xconnect all >>>> Legend: XC ST=Xconnect State S1=Segment1 State S2=Segment2 State >>>> UP=Up DN=Down AD=Admin Down IA=Inactive SB=Standby RV=Recovering >>>> NH=No Hardware XC ST Segment 1 S1 Segment 2 >>>> S2 >>>> >> ------+---------------------------------+--+-------------------------- >> ------+---------------------------------+--+--- >>>> ----+-- >>>> UP ac Gi0/3.99:99(Eth VLAN) UP mpls 62.215.0.194:133 UP >>>> >>>> PE2#sh xconnect peer 62.215.0.194 all detail Core network division >>>> Xconnect test >>>> Distribution: Confidential Page 5 >>>> Legend: XC ST=Xconnect State S1=Segment1 State S2=Segment2 State >>>> UP=Up DN=Down AD=Admin Down IA=Inactive SB=Standby RV=Recovering >>>> NH=No Hardware XC ST Segment 1 S1 Segment 2 >>>> S2 >>>> >> ------+---------------------------------+--+-------------------------- >> ------+---------------------------------+--+--- >>>> ----+-- >>>> UP ac Gi0/3.99:99(Eth VLAN) UP mpls 62.215.0.194:133 UP >>>> Interworking: ip Local VC label 276 Remote VC label 3090 >>>> pw-class: inter-ether >>>> >>>> TEC-TEST#sh mpls l2transport binding 133 Destination Address: >>>> 62.215.0.194, VC ID: 133 Local Label: 276 >>>> Cbit: 1, VC Type: IP, GroupID: 0 >>>> MTU: 4470, Interface Desc: n/a >>>> VCCV: CC Type: CW [1], RA [2] >>>> CV Type: LSPV [2] >>>> Remote Label: 3090 >>>> Cbit: 1, VC Type: IP, GroupID: 0 >>>> MTU: 4470, Interface Desc: n/a >>>> VCCV: CC Type: RA [2] >>>> CV Type: LSPV [2] >>>> TEC-TEST#sh mpls l2transport vc 133 detail Local interface: >>>> Gi0/3.99 up, line protocol up, Eth VLAN 99 up MPLS VC type is Eth >>>> VLAN, interworking type is IP Destination address: 62.215.0.194, VC >>>> ID: 133, VC status: up Output interface: Gi0/1, imposed label stack >>>> {3090} Preferred path: not configured Default path: active Next >>>> hop: 62.215.0.49 Create time: 03:55:11, last status change time: >>>> 03:55:11 Signaling protocol: LDP, peer 62.215.0.194:0 up Targeted >>>> Hello: 62.215.0.222(LDP Id) -> 62.215.0.194 Status TLV support >>>> (local/remote) : enabled/supported Label/status state machine : >>>> established, LruRru Last local dataplane status rcvd: no fault Last >>>> local SSS circuit status rcvd: no fault Last local SSS circuit >>>> status sent: no fault Last local LDP TLV status sent: no fault Last >>>> remote LDP TLV status rcvd: no fault MPLS VC labels: local 276, >>>> remote 3090 Group ID: local 0, remote 0 >>>> MTU: local 4470, remote 4470 >>>> Remote interface description: >>>> Sequencing: receive disabled, send disabled VC statistics: >>>> packet totals: receive 1034, send 1034 byte totals: receive >>>> 1066540, send 1089288 packet drops: receive 0, seq error 0, send 0 >>>> Core network division Xconnect test >>>> Distribution: Confidential Page 6 >>>> PING >>>> TESTING2#ping 172.16.18.98 repeat 1000 size 1500 Type escape >>>> sequence to abort. >>>> Sending 1000, 1500-byte ICMP Echos to 172.16.18.98, timeout is 2 >> seconds: >>>> !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >>>> !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >>>> !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >>>> !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >>>> !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >>>> !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >>>> !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >>>> !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >>>> !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >>>> !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >>>> !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >>>> !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >>>> !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >>>> !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >>>> !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >>>> Success rate is 100 percent (1000/1000), round-trip min/avg/max = >>>> 40/43/60 ms >>>> >>>> BR, >>>> Mohammad >>>> >>>>> Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 14:53:17 +0530 >>>>> Subject: Interworking in L2VPN >>>>> From: [email protected] >>>>> To: [email protected]; [email protected] >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hi all >>>>> >>>>> I have a scenario where my Frame-Relay to Ethernet interworking is >>>>> not working properly. Can someone tell me what are all the >>>>> parameters to >>>> match >>>>> when forming a T-LDP Pseudowire to be established between Ethernet >>>>> one >>>> side >>>>> of pseudowire and Frame Relay on the other side of Pseudowire. >>>>> I know that there are certain parameters to match to make my >>>>> Pseudowire T-LDP up The parameters are : >>>>> 1.VC-ID >>>>> 2.VC <http://2.vc/> Type ( Port, VLAN, etc) 3.Interface MTU (AC) >>>>> 4. LDP password >>>>> >>>>> But when u have interworking configured on both sides , Ur VC Type >>>>> wont be matched on both the sides. In this cases, how will my >>>>> T-LDP session >>>> will >>>>> be up ? >>>>> >>>>> How will the Control plane signaling happens when there is a >>>>> different >> VC >>>>> types on both sides and i have configured my Interworking on both >>>>> the >>>> sides. >>>>> >>>>> How will the router signal the other end of the peer to know which >>>>> VC >>>> Type >>>>> it is using and also the Interworking has been configured ? >>>>> >>>>> Is the use of Control Word comes into picture here ? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> With Warmest Regards, >>>>> >>>>> CCIE KID >>>>> CCIE#29992 (Security) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net >>>>> >>>>> __________________________________________________________________ >>>>> _____ Subscription information may be found at: >>>>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> With Warmest Regards, >>> >>> CCIE KID >>> CCIE#29992 (Security) >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> Message: 3 >>> Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 09:53:08 +0200 >>> From: Ren? Huet <[email protected]> >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: [OSL | CCIE_RS] WB-1 LAB-17 TASK-17.3 >>> Message-ID: >>> >>> <CADFAz+6e2xs2+a-=5E=6eJTxKM7nMUdxkyezaSyfQLkeSxVz=w...@mail.gmail.com> >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 >>> >>> Dear all, >>> >>> For the WB-1 LAB-17 TASK-17.3 >>> >>> Why we don't deny any 150.100.78.8 >>> what is the difference between deny any 150.100.78.8 or Network address? >>> >>> Normally if I deny any 150.100.78.8 (NVI) is ok no ? >>> >>> If anyone has an explanation I'm interested >>> >>> Best regards >>> >>> Ren? >>> >>> >>> End of CCIE_RS Digest, Vol 76, Issue 48 >>> *************************************** >> _______________________________________________ >> 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://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 _______________________________________________ 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
