Jay, I am from IPT background. Already completed CCIE Voice sometime back. Now working on 2nd CCIE
It's not my atttitude , but the truth after discussing with many people. When we try to convince customers to go for Cisco , sometimes vendors like Avaya are better than Cisco. Cisco always come with innovative technologies first & other competitors can't. But stability / bugs , etc.. are not well addressed in Cisco IPT compared to others. (As a partner we have to have more visits to customers & our managers are worried about this). I believe cisco doesn't pay enough attention to such things. Cisco support team (TAC) is somehow the best in Voice. I think Cisco Routers are the best in the world. Nobody else can reach that level. CCIE lab is too hard & that's why people try to use dumps (even IPX mock-labs were designed to cover questions very similar to actual lab otherwise IPX students can't clear CCIE) . If cisco can reduce the difficulty level & introduce a large question pool that would be nice & dump companies have to close then. I think it's going to happen as CCIE program managers mentioned. Thanks On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 5:36 PM, Jay McMickle <[email protected]>wrote: > 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://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/> <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://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://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://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
