2811's 3560's 3750's seems to be across the board certainly for route-maps -- BR
Sent from my iPhone on 3 On 27 Jun 2013, at 22:31, Nick Bonifacio <[email protected]> wrote: > Would these ACLs/Route-maps happen to be on a 6500 series ? > > From: Tony Singh <[email protected]> > To: Joe S <[email protected]> > Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2013 3:11 PM > Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] CCIE_RS Digest, Vol 89, Issue 25 > > I'd say there's no hits in that case, I've wondered why route-maps never show > byte hits at the bottom when running show route-map command is run and when > you know the maps are doing their job :/ > > -- > BR > > Tony > > Sent from my iPad > > On 27 Jun 2013, at 14:33, Joe S <[email protected]> wrote: > > > What should be a simple access-list question. > > > > Why is it that some access-lists will show the number of hits and some > > won't? I have yet to see a pattern. > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 11:00 AM, > > <[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. Version 5.0 Update (Bill Riley) > >> 2. Re: Version 5.0 Update (Bob McCouch) > >> 3. CCNP-to-CCIE Transition Kit; Route Lab 2; Task 7.6; > >> ([email protected]) > >> 4. Re: Version 5.0 Update ([email protected]) > >> > >> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > >> Message: 1 > >> Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 11:01:05 -0500 > >> From: Bill Riley <[email protected]> > >> To: [email protected] > >> Subject: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Version 5.0 Update > >> Message-ID: <[email protected]> > >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > >> > >> Any rumor from Cisco Live on a version update? > >> > >> > >> ------------------------------ > >> > >> Message: 2 > >> Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 12:46:57 -0400 > >> From: Bob McCouch <[email protected]> > >> To: Bill Riley <[email protected]> > >> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > >> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Version 5.0 Update > >> Message-ID: <-3737896519547143256@unknownmsgid> > >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > >> > >> I wasn't at the techtorials, but word is no blueprint change was > >> announced. Still v4. > >> > >> Bob > >> -- > >> Sent from my iPhone, please excuse any typos. > >> > >> On Jun 24, 2013, at 12:46 PM, Bill Riley <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Any rumor from Cisco Live on a version update? > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> 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: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 10:00:53 -0500 > >> From: [email protected] > >> To: <[email protected]> > >> Subject: [OSL | CCIE_RS] CCNP-to-CCIE Transition Kit; Route Lab 2; > >> Task 7.6; > >> Message-ID: <[email protected]> > >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed > >> > >> CCNP-to-CCIE Transition Kit; Route Lab 2; Task 7.6; Problem reaching > >> external "ISP" networks on R9 via R2,R4,&R5. I can reach them from R6. > >> Everything works as it should. Accourding to the DSG, I am only looking > >> to see if the default 0.0.0.0/0 route is in the table. It does not test > >> reach ability, and neither does the task say to test reach ability and > >> that it should be working. I'd imagine I would want to get out of the > >> network, or what's the point? > >> > >> Starting on R9; > >> R9#sh run | sec router bgp > >> router bgp 65001 > >> neighbor 173.16.121.6 default-originate > >> > >> Then R6; > >> > >> R6#sh ip bgp > >> BGP table version is 11, local router ID is 173.16.121.6 > >> Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path > >> *> 0.0.0.0 170.70.255.9 0 0 65001 i > >> *> 170.70.0.0/21 170.70.255.9 0 0 65001 i > >> *> 173.16.100.0/22 0.0.0.0 0 32768 i > >> *> 173.16.104.0/21 0.0.0.0 0 32768 i > >> *> 173.16.112.0/21 0.0.0.0 0 32768 i > >> *> 173.16.120.0/22 0.0.0.0 0 32768 i > >> R6#sh ip route > >> Gateway of last resort is 170.70.255.9 to network 0.0.0.0 > >> B* 0.0.0.0/0 [20/0] via 170.70.255.9, 00:08:31 > >> R6# > >> R6(config)#router ospf 65101 > >> R6(config-router)#default-information originate > >> R6(config-router)#end > >> R6# > >> > >> Then I check R5; > >> R5#clear ip route * > >> R5#sh ip route 0.0.0.0 > >> Routing entry for 0.0.0.0/0, supernet > >> Known via "ospf 65101", distance 110, metric 1, candidate default > >> path > >> Tag 65101, type extern 2, forward metric 64 > >> Last update from 160.171.90.3 on Serial0/0/0, 00:00:02 ago > >> Routing Descriptor Blocks: > >> * 160.171.90.3, from 173.16.121.6, 00:00:02 ago, via Serial0/0/0 > >> Route metric is 1, traffic share count is 1 > >> Route tag 65101 > >> > >> R5#ping 170.70.255.9 > >> > >> Type escape sequence to abort. > >> Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 170.70.255.9, timeout is 2 seconds: > >> ... > >> Success rate is 0 percent (0/3) > >> R5#ping 160.171.90.38 > >> > >> Type escape sequence to abort. > >> Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 160.171.90.38, timeout is 2 seconds: > >> !!!!! > >> Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 4/4/4 ms > >> R5#ping 160.171.90.37 > >> > >> Type escape sequence to abort. > >> Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 160.171.90.37, timeout is 2 seconds: > >> ..... > >> Success rate is 0 percent (0/5) > >> > >> > >> I can reach the ExtraNet office over the frame relay link from the > >> small office and big office. I just can't reach the R9 networks from > >> ExtraNet switches, Small & Big office. The following shows reachability > >> from R6 to R9's networks; > >> > >> R6#tclsh > >> R6(tcl)#foreach address { > >> +>(tcl)#160.171.90.37 > >> +>(tcl)#160.171.90.41 > >> +>(tcl)#170.70.255.9 > >> +>(tcl)#170.70.0.1 > >> +>(tcl)#170.70.1.1 > >> +>(tcl)#170.70.2.1 > >> +>(tcl)#170.70.3.1 > >> +>(tcl)#170.70.4.1 > >> +>(tcl)#170.70.5.1 > >> +>(tcl)#170.70.6.1 > >> +>(tcl)#170.70.7.9 > >> +>(tcl)#} { ping $address } > >> > >> Type escape sequence to abort. > >> Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 160.171.90.37, timeout is 2 seconds: > >> !!!!! > >> Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 1/3/4 ms > >> Type escape sequence to abort. > >> Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 160.171.90.41, timeout is 2 seconds: > >> !!!!! > >> Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 1/2/4 ms > >> Type escape sequence to abort. > >> Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 170.70.255.9, timeout is 2 seconds: > >> !!!!! > >> Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 4/4/4 ms > >> Type escape sequence to abort. > >> Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 170.70.0.1, timeout is 2 seconds: > >> !!!!! > >> Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 4/4/4 ms > >> Type escape sequence to abort. > >> Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 170.70.1.1, timeout is 2 seconds: > >> !!!!! > >> Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 4/4/5 ms > >> Type escape sequence to abort. > >> Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 170.70.2.1, timeout is 2 seconds: > >> !!!!! > >> Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 1/3/8 ms > >> Type escape sequence to abort. > >> Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 170.70.3.1, timeout is 2 seconds: > >> !!!!! > >> Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 4/4/4 ms > >> Type escape sequence to abort. > >> Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 170.70.4.1, timeout is 2 seconds: > >> !!!!! > >> Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 4/4/5 ms > >> Type escape sequence to abort. > >> Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 170.70.5.1, timeout is 2 seconds: > >> !!!!! > >> Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 4/4/4 ms > >> Type escape sequence to abort. > >> Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 170.70.6.1, timeout is 2 seconds: > >> !!!!! > >> Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 4/4/4 ms > >> Type escape sequence to abort. > >> Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 170.70.7.9, timeout is 2 seconds: > >> !!!!! > >> Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 4/4/4 ms > >> R6(tcl)#exit > >> > >> I checked my answers to the DSG, they look good. I even went as far as > >> to do exactly what the DSG did. And I still can't reach the networks > >> that are pingable above on R6 when doing the same on R2,R4,&R5. None of > >> the Cat switches can reach them either. I even tried to redistribute > >> using a prefix-list to only get the default route into OSPF from BGP; > >> > >> !-- on R6 > >> ip prefix-list DEFAULT_ROUTE seq 10 permit 0.0.0.0/0 > >> route-map PERMIT_DEFAULT_ROUTE permit 10 > >> match ip address prefix-list DEFAULT_ROUTE > >> exit > >> route-map PERMIT_DEFAULT_ROUTE deny 20 > >> router ospf 65101 > >> no default-information originate > >> redistribute bgp 65101 route-map PERMIT_DEFAULT_ROUTE subnets > >> > >> The default route 0.0.0.0 doesn't even show up on R2,R4,&R5. So I tried > >> the following; > >> > >> !-- on R6 > >> router bgp 65101 > >> neighbor 170.70.255.9 shutdown > >> exit > >> ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 160.171.90.37 30 > >> ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 160.171.90.41 30 > >> router ospf 65101 > >> redistribute static route-map PERMIT_DEFAULT_ROUTE subnets > >> exit > >> > >> again the default route does not show up R2,R4,&R5. any help would be > >> much appreciated (even knowing that it's not supposed to work would be > >> cool). > >> > >> -Joey > >> > >> > >> ------------------------------ > >> > >> Message: 4 > >> Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 13:36:10 -0400 > >> From: [email protected] > >> To: Bob McCouch <[email protected]> > >> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > >> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Version 5.0 Update > >> Message-ID: <[email protected]> > >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > >> > >> I went to the tech course on Sunday. The word is that v5.0 will be > >> announced later this calendar year. No dates were given and it was clear > >> that they don't have a date yet for the announcement or for the change. No > >> specifics were released directly about changes but several hints were > >> given. The test won't change much but frame relay will probably go away > >> and IPv6 will have a bigger role. That was about all they would tell us. > >> > >> Hope that helps. > >> > >> Sent from my iPhone > >> > >> On Jun 24, 2013, at 12:46 PM, Bob McCouch <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >>> I wasn't at the techtorials, but word is no blueprint change was > >>> announced. Still v4. > >>> > >>> Bob > >>> -- > >>> Sent from my iPhone, please excuse any typos. > >>> > >>> On Jun 24, 2013, at 12:46 PM, Bill Riley <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Any rumor from Cisco Live on a version update? > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> 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 89, Issue 25 > >> *************************************** > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > 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
