Ah Jay your in the CCIE circle I'm new to all this didn't know about Darby.
BR Tony Sent from my iPhone on 3 On 18 May 2012, at 13:06, [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: CCIE how to pass the lab (light humour) > (Thomas Raabo - Zitcom A/S) > 2. Re: Access list question (Fulvio allegretti) > 3. Re: CCIE how to pass the lab (light humour) (Jay McMickle) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 07:00:02 +0000 > From: Thomas Raabo - Zitcom A/S <[email protected]> > To: Ken Wyan <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] CCIE how to pass the lab (light humour) > Message-ID: > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Even mr Cisco Russ White is no more. > > Thomas > > -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- > Fra: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] P? 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 > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 11:01:24 +0000 > From: Fulvio allegretti <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Access list question > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > > Yes I did mean 0.0.0.14 and thanks I can see now that my one doesn't match > any of the odd > > > > Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 18:36:27 -0500 > Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Access list question > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > CC: [email protected] > > I think you must be because your access-list is going to match > > > 200.0.0.1 > 200.0.0.2 > 200.0.2.0 > 200.0.4.0 > 200.0.6.0 > 200.0.8.0 > 200.0.10.0 > 200.0.12.0 > 200.0.14.0 > > > > > I think you meant that second line to be access-list 14 permit 200.0.0.2 > 0.0.0.14 which still isn't going to match .3 .5 .7 .9 .11 .13 > > > > > > On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 4:49 PM, Fulvio allegretti <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Lab 13 Vol 2 - The task is only hosts with a source ip address range > 200.0.0.1 to 200.0.0.14 should be allowed access, use the least amount of > lines > > my solution: > access-list 14 permit 200.0.0.1 > access-list 14 permit 200.0.0.2 0.0.14.0 > > IPX solution: > access-list 23 deny 200.0.0.0 > access-list 23 deny 200.0.0.15 > access-list 23 permit 200.0.0.0 0.0.0.15 > > This is not the first time I have seen IPX solutions use this approach > instead of mine, am I missing something? > Fulvio > > > _______________________________________________ > 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: 3 > Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 07:06:18 -0500 > From: Jay McMickle <[email protected]> > To: Thomas Raabo - Zitcom A/S <[email protected]> > Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] CCIE how to pass the lab (light humour) > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > > 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]] P? 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 > > > End of CCIE_RS Digest, Vol 76, Issue 50 > *************************************** _______________________________________________ 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
