Marko' signatures are all over Any of the difficult labs in volume 3.

Regards,
 Joe Sanchez

On Jul 9, 2012, at 6:07 PM, Marko Milivojevic <[email protected]> wrote:

> Spot on :-)
> 
> --
> Marko Milivojevic - CCIE #18427
> 
> :: This message was sent from a mobile device. I apologize for errors and 
> brevity. ::
> 
> On Jul 9, 2012, at 17:33, Nick Bonifacio <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> Exactly.. I am 100% sure Marko created this one :o)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ________________________________
>> From: Tom Kacprzynski <[email protected]>
>> To: Nick Bonifacio <[email protected]>; [email protected] 
>> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
>> Sent: Monday, July 9, 2012 11:18 AM
>> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Vol 3 Lab 5 ticket 1
>> 
>> 
>> Thank you for responding. Yes those are p2m non-broadcast. I understand that 
>> it creates the /32 and those are more preferred than the directly connected 
>> /24 subnet, but my question is why would the /32 be routed over other 
>> routers and not directly connected interface? Why would those /32 not have a 
>> better cost than directly connected links.... Oh wait it think i just 
>> figured it out. The cost of the frame-relay links is a lot higher by default 
>> than the cost of using FastEthernet links over few other routers, that's 
>> why....well played IPexpert...well played :)
>> 
>> Thanks
>> 
>> Tom
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 8:40 AM, Nick Bonifacio <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Tom,
>>> 
>>> Is the ospf network type point-to-multipoint non-broadcast?  I believe that 
>>> network type causes /32 host routes to be advertised?  
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Nick 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> From: Tom Kacprzynski <[email protected]>
>>> To: [email protected] 
>>> Sent: Sunday, July 8, 2012 11:13 PM
>>> Subject: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Vol 3 Lab 5 ticket 1
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Hello,
>>> Question regarding this ticket. It was about a BGP session not coming up
>>> because routers were using point to multipoint non-broadcast ospf network
>>> types and the /32 were being advertised using a different path and source
>>> interfaces.
>>> 
>>> I was able to solve it with ebgp multihop and specifying the source
>>> interface. My question is why did these routers use the /32 host routes
>>> going over few other routers and not directly connected interfaces? So I
>>> understand the ticket solution just don't understand how the problem was
>>> setup to cause it.
>>> 
>>> Thanks in advance for any help.
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> 
>>> Tom
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please 
>>> visit http://www.ipexpert.com/
>>> 
>>> Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out 
>>> 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

Reply via email to