I agree, but what if I made all my ospf neighbour sessions to the routers by 
then and they peered up because the mtu was set to 1500.  I definitely see the 
argument for changing it.  I am providing an argument that we don't always need 
to.
I know we should be looking ahead too and should see issues like that but I 
made lots of oversights due to pressure that cost me time just like that one.

Sent from my iPhone

On 19/10/2012, at 12:28 PM, "Nick Bonifacio" <[email protected]> wrote:

> What if you reload it when the proctor says "time for lunch!" ?
> 
> Sent from my iPad
> 
> On Oct 18, 2012, at 8:36 PM, Michael Davis - Webquor <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> 
>> Hi everyone - My question is "why would you do it?"  if the question only
>> asks you to ensure that two devices are CDP neighbours and that is it,
>> then there is no need.
>> The proctor at Sydney said that nothing outside the scope of the question
>> was looked at or verified, and any extra configuration was not looked at
>> providing it didn't interfere with the working configuration.  So to save
>> time I would leave it alone in that case.
>> After being through the lab and having finished the config section with 30
>> secs to go, I can definitely see that the extra 5-10 mins taken to reload
>> a switch/s and verify everything has come back up again could hurt.
>> 
>> On 19/10/12 2:58 AM, "Bob McCouch" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> I would just do it! But a few minutes ago you said you wouldn't bother
>>> unless the task mentioned a 1500-byte MTU so I was curious why you
>>> lean that way vs the "safe" path. Just concern for the time of a
>>> reboot?
>>> 
>>> Bob
>>> -- 
>>> Sent from my iPhone, please excuse any typos.
>>> 
>>> On Oct 18, 2012, at 11:55 AM, Marko Milivojevic <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> It's a tough call to make really. The only correct answer must come
>>>> from someone who's grading the lab. You know what needs to be done to
>>>> be safe, so... why not just do it?
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Marko Milivojevic - CCIE #18427 (SP R&S)
>>>> Senior CCIE Instructor - IPexpert
>>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 10:46 AM, Bob McCouch <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> Ha, got me on that one! Yes, they'd need to specify the df-bit.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Here's my question on interpretation then... Cisco's documentation on
>>>>> QQ
>>>>> tunneling states that you "must" bump the MTU:
>>>>> 
>>>>> "Because the IEEE 802.1Q tunneling feature increases the frame size by
>>>>> 4
>>>>> bytes when the metro tag is added, you must configure all switches in
>>>>> the
>>>>> service-provider network to be able to process maximum frames by
>>>>> increasing
>>>>> the switch system MTU size to at least 1504 bytes." (emphasis mine,
>>>>> source
>>>>> 
>>>>> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/lan/catalyst3560/software/relea
>>>>> se/12.2_46_se/configuration/guide/swtunnel.html#wp1001068)
>>>>> 
>>>>> With this in mind, should we not assume that means we have to do it,
>>>>> as the
>>>>> config guide states it as a "must"? Just like MTU on PPPoE interfaces
>>>>> --
>>>>> I've configured PPPoE dialer interfaces just fine without specifying
>>>>> 1492
>>>>> MTU, but every time you see an official example config (or an IPExpert
>>>>> DSG
>>>>> solution as well!) they specify the MTU. I have assumed that means I
>>>>> damn
>>>>> well better do it too if I want points on such a task.
>>>>> 
>>>>> What do you think, Marko?
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 11:38 AM, Marko Milivojevic
>>>>> <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 9:30 AM, Bob McCouch <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>> And if the grading script used "ping X.X.X.X size 1500" to test? :-)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> It would still work, since packets would be fragmented ;-). On the
>>>>>> other hand, if they added "df-bit" to that command... another story.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> That said - unless the lab asks for 1500-byte payload, I wouldn't
>>>>>> bother with it. Then again, if you think rebooting a switch won't take
>>>>>> from your time, why not do it and not worry? Just keep in mind that
>>>>>> changing "system mtu" will change IP MTU as well, which may have
>>>>>> impact for routing protocols running on the switch. Luckily, you can
>>>>>> fix that without a reboot with "system mtu routing"
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Marko Milivojevic - CCIE #18427 (SP R&S)
>>>>>> Senior CCIE Instructor - IPexpert
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> How about routing adjacencies? Might OSPF get tripped up by neighbors
>>>>>>> agreeing they have 1500 byte MTU, but not being able to actually pass
>>>>>>> 1500
>>>>>>> during LSADB sync?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The devil is in those details.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Mills, Derek <
>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Good questions Bob and I guess I need to know the answers. Perhaps
>>>>>>>> my
>>>>>>>> downfall is that I would configure it, run a few various pings to
>>>>>>>> verify
>>>>>>>> the reachability requirement, and would count those points when
>>>>>>>> there
>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>> no other lab requirements indicating that an mtu change is
>>>>>>>> warranted.****
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> ** **
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> ** **
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> ** **
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> ** **
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> ** **
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> *From:* Bob McCouch [mailto:[email protected]]
>>>>>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, October 18, 2012 9:17 AM
>>>>>>>> *To:* Mills, Derek
>>>>>>>> *Cc:* [email protected]
>>>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Dot1q Tunnel and MTU****
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> ** **
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Hi Derek,****
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> ** **
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> You say "most times" and you are correct. What are the times it
>>>>>>>> wouldn't
>>>>>>>> work? How might those times bite you either while configuring later
>>>>>>>> elements of your lab, or how they might test your solution with a
>>>>>>>> grading
>>>>>>>> script?****
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> ** **
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> We must learn the right thing to do, even if IOS doesn't warn you
>>>>>>>> about
>>>>>>>> something. :-)****
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> ** **
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> ** **
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 9:01 AM, Mills, Derek <
>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:****
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Most times configuring dot1q tunnel in the lab will work just fine
>>>>>>>> without
>>>>>>>> changing the MTU on the switches. What is the opinion on whether we
>>>>>>>> should
>>>>>>>> change it or not? If there is a specific task requirement for it
>>>>>>>> there
>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>> no question, but is it expected and standard procedure just to
>>>>>>>> increase
>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>> ALL the time when you configure it? Will you miss the points if you
>>>>>>>> don't
>>>>>>>> configure it?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> DEREK MILLS
>>>>>>>> <><
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> ----
>>>>>>>> Anheuser-Busch InBev Email Disclaimer www.ab-inbev.com
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> 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****
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> ** **
>>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>>> Anheuser-Busch InBev Email Disclaimer
>>>>>>>> www.ab-inbev.com<http://www.ab-inbev.com/disclaimer.cfm>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> 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
_______________________________________________
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