Good Luck!

-Thanks,
Daniel Lucas

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] 
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Joe Sanchez
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2014 3:34 PM
To: Kenyone Johnson
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] CCIE_RS Digest, Vol 99, Issue 1

Good luck. 

Regards,
 Joe Sanchez

( please excuse the brevity of this email as it was sent via a mobile device.  
Please excuse misspelled words or sentence structure.) 

> On Apr 1, 2014, at 11:49 AM, Kenyone Johnson <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Taking my lab next Friday.
> 
> I've looked at a lot of posts on here, I've been labbing a lot.  I'm still 
> studying.  I feel like I'm very good, and my speed has increased.  I'm still 
> quite nervous.  I hope I can interpret everything in the lab.  I've learned 
> that this is a key skill for the lab.  
> 
>> From: [email protected]
>> Subject: CCIE_RS Digest, Vol 99, Issue 1
>> To: [email protected]
>> Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2014 12:00:08 -0400
>> 
>> 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: EIGRP Metric Weight (Bob McCouch)
>>   2. Re: EIGRP Metric Weight (Joe Sanchez)
>>   3. Re: EIGRP Metric Weight (Jim Newell)
>>   4. Re: EIGRP Metric Weight (Bob McCouch)
>>   5. Re: CCIE_RS Digest, Vol 98, Issue 9  EIGRP Metric Weight.eml
>>      (Joey)
>>   6. Re: EIGRP Metric Weight.eml (Jim Newell)
>>   7. VOL2 LAB2 (freddy morales)
>> 
>> 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> -
>> 
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 12:11:31 -0400
>> From: Bob McCouch <[email protected]>
>> To: Jim Newell <[email protected]>
>> Cc: CCIE OSL <[email protected]>
>> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] EIGRP Metric Weight
>> Message-ID:
>>    
>> <cajfuddyg-lvzfvzozw2mehasrgnfnomgj2tsvo4or8pxkyh...@mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>> 
>> Doc-CD is a good place to start:
>> 
>> http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/ios-xml/ios/iproute_eigrp/config
>> uration/15-mt/ire-15-mt-book/ire-enhanced-igrp.html#GUID-79D5B9EF-B4D
>> 4-4034-B275-347E866420C0
>> 
>> Support Home > Products > Cisco IOS and NX-OS Software > Cisco IOS > 
>> Cisco IOS Software Release 15M&T > Cisco IOS 15.1M&T > Cisco IOS 
>> 15.1(4)M > IP
>> Routing: EIGRP Configuration Guide > EIGRP > EIGRP Cost Metrics
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Jim Newell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Greetings,
>>> I am not sure anyone else has had this same issue. I find myself 
>>> always failing tasks that require adjusting the metric weights under 
>>> the EIGRP process - something that should be easy points.  I have 
>>> searched unsuccessfully for a good reference that shows how 
>>> bandwidth, delay and load are mapped to values K1, K2, etc.  If 
>>> anyone has a good, reliable reference that clears this up can you 
>>> kindly point me to it.
>>> 
>>> Much appreciated
>>> Kind regards
>>> jpn
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Free CCIE R&S, Collaboration, Data Center, Wireless & Security Videos ::
>>> 
>>> iPexpert on YouTube: www.youtube.com/ipexpertinc
>> 
>> 
>> ------------------------------
>> 
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 12:27:54 -0500
>> From: Joe Sanchez <[email protected]>
>> To: Bob McCouch <[email protected]>
>> Cc: CCIE OSL <[email protected]>
>> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] EIGRP Metric Weight
>> Message-ID:
>>    
>> <cajvjoefkbnjjappnjhvf6ocq0tohwii20na27wd5zv9imgp...@mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>> 
>> Jim,
>> 
>> Joe Astorino did a blog on this a while back.  Although one of his 
>> metrics is off, it should answer any of your questions.  If not, as 
>> mentioned the Doc-CD? and Ivan' book should be good.
>> 
>> http://blog.ipexpert.com/2010/03/03/eigrp-metric-k-values/
>> 
>> Joe Sanchez
>> 
>> 
>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Bob McCouch <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Doc-CD is a good place to start:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/ios-xml/ios/iproute_eigrp/confi
>>> guration/15-mt/ire-15-mt-book/ire-enhanced-igrp.html#GUID-79D5B9EF-B
>>> 4D4-4034-B275-347E866420C0
>>> 
>>> Support Home > Products > Cisco IOS and NX-OS Software > Cisco IOS > 
>>> Cisco IOS Software Release 15M&T > Cisco IOS 15.1M&T > Cisco IOS 
>>> 15.1(4)M > IP
>>> Routing: EIGRP Configuration Guide > EIGRP > EIGRP Cost Metrics
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Jim Newell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Greetings,
>>>> I am not sure anyone else has had this same issue. I find myself 
>>>> always failing tasks that require adjusting the metric weights 
>>>> under the EIGRP process - something that should be easy points.  I 
>>>> have searched unsuccessfully for a good reference that shows how 
>>>> bandwidth, delay and load are mapped to values K1, K2, etc.  If 
>>>> anyone has a good, reliable
>>> reference
>>>> that clears this up can you kindly point me to it.
>>>> 
>>>> Much appreciated
>>>> Kind regards
>>>> jpn
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Free CCIE R&S, Collaboration, Data Center, Wireless & Security Videos ::
>>>> 
>>>> iPexpert on YouTube: www.youtube.com/ipexpertinc
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Free CCIE R&S, Collaboration, Data Center, Wireless & Security Videos ::
>>> 
>>> iPexpert on YouTube: www.youtube.com/ipexpertinc
>> 
>> 
>> ------------------------------
>> 
>> Message: 3
>> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:43:47 -0400
>> From: "Jim Newell" <[email protected]>
>> To: <[email protected]>
>> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] EIGRP Metric Weight
>> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>> 
>> Thanks Bob. I navigated to that link yesterday while trying to 
>> complete a task and looked at the items listed in table 1 and the 
>> items in table 2 and made an assumption that they should be matched 
>> up according to the listed order.  When checking the proposed solution later 
>> I had one value in the wrong location.
>> 
>> Requirement was to use delay, load and bandwidth:
>> My solution: metric weights 0 1 0 1 1 0 Proposed solution: metric 
>> weights 0 1 1 1 0 0
>> 
>> I have run into issues with this topic before, so it may just be that 
>> I am missing something obvious
>> 
>> Much appreciated
>> Kind regards
>> jpn
>> 
>> ------ Original Message ------
>> Received: 12:12 PM EDT, 03/31/2014
>> From: Bob McCouch <[email protected]>
>> To: Jim Newell <[email protected]>Cc: CCIE OSL 
>> <[email protected]>
>> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] EIGRP Metric Weight
>> 
>> Doc-CD is a good place to start:
>> 
>> http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/ios-xml/ios/iproute_eigrp/config
>> uration/15-mt/ire-15-mt-book/ire-enhanced-igrp.html#GUID-79D5B9EF-B4D
>> 4-4034-B275-347E866420C0
>> 
>> Support Home > Products > Cisco IOS and NX-OS Software > Cisco IOS > 
>> Cisco IOS Software Release 15M&T > Cisco IOS 15.1M&T > Cisco IOS 
>> 15.1(4)M > IP
>> Routing: EIGRP Configuration Guide > EIGRP > EIGRP Cost Metrics
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Jim Newell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Greetings,
>>> I am not sure anyone else has had this same issue. I find myself 
>>> always failing tasks that require adjusting the metric weights under 
>>> the EIGRP process - something that should be easy points.  I have 
>>> searched unsuccessfully for a good reference that shows how 
>>> bandwidth, delay and load are mapped to values K1, K2, etc.  If 
>>> anyone has a good, reliable reference that clears this up can you 
>>> kindly point me to it.
>>> 
>>> Much appreciated
>>> Kind regards
>>> jpn
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Free CCIE R&S, Collaboration, Data Center, Wireless & Security Videos ::
>>> 
>>> iPexpert on YouTube: www.youtube.com/ipexpertinc
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ------------------------------
>> 
>> Message: 4
>> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:04:44 -0400
>> From: Bob McCouch <[email protected]>
>> To: Jim Newell <[email protected]>
>> Cc: CCIE OSL <[email protected]>
>> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] EIGRP Metric Weight
>> Message-ID:
>>    
>> <CAJFuDdZuu59A1KeCM9usC6i16Xo-dkMGpqL03=6kuf8f8xe...@mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>> 
>> Hi Jim,
>> 
>> The formula is right above table 1:
>> 
>> EIGRP composite cost metric = 256*((K1*Bw) + (K2*Bw)/(256 - Load) + 
>> (K3*Delay)*(K5/(Reliability + K4)))
>> 
>> So your solution (ignoring the leading 0, which off the top of my 
>> head I forget the significance of -- maybe that's the magic new K 
>> they added in recent code), would use BW, Delay, and then 
>> 0/Reliability+1, which clearly wouldn't do much for you. Off hand, I 
>> forget if IOS just ignores K4 if K5 is not also set, but you'd kind 
>> of think it would need to so as to avoid a divide-by-zero error.
>> 
>> I always remember that the default is "10100" because it looks like 
>> 10/100 as in a switch port. So obviously positions 1 & 3 (K1, and K3) 
>> rep the default weighted values of BW and Delay. I'd look up anything 
>> else, as the consequences are huge to forgetting which on is 
>> reliability and which one is load (as you've observed).
>> 
>> 
>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 1:43 PM, Jim Newell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Thanks Bob. I navigated to that link yesterday while trying to 
>>> complete a task and looked at the items listed in table 1 and the 
>>> items in table 2 and made an assumption that they should be matched 
>>> up according to the listed order.
>>> When
>>> checking the proposed solution later I had one value in the wrong location.
>>> 
>>> Requirement was to use delay, load and bandwidth:
>>> My solution: metric weights 0 1 0 1 1 0 Proposed solution: metric 
>>> weights 0 1 1 1 0 0
>>> 
>>> I have run into issues with this topic before, so it may just be 
>>> that I am missing something obvious
>>> 
>>> Much appreciated
>>> Kind regards
>>> jpn
>>> 
>>> ------ Original Message ------
>>> Received: 12:12 PM EDT, 03/31/2014
>>> From: Bob McCouch <[email protected]>
>>> To: Jim Newell <[email protected]>Cc: CCIE OSL 
>>> <[email protected]
>>> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] EIGRP Metric Weight
>>> 
>>> Doc-CD is a good place to start:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/ios-xml/ios/iproute_eigrp/confi
>>> guration/15-mt/ire-15-mt-book/ire-enhanced-igrp.html#GUID-79D5B9EF-B
>>> 4D4-4034-B275-347E866420C0
>>> 
>>> Support Home > Products > Cisco IOS and NX-OS Software > Cisco IOS > 
>>> Cisco IOS Software Release 15M&T > Cisco IOS 15.1M&T > Cisco IOS 
>>> 15.1(4)M > IP
>>> Routing: EIGRP Configuration Guide > EIGRP > EIGRP Cost Metrics
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Jim Newell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Greetings,
>>>> I am not sure anyone else has had this same issue. I find myself 
>>>> always failing tasks that require adjusting the metric weights 
>>>> under the EIGRP process - something that should be easy points.  I 
>>>> have searched unsuccessfully for a good reference that shows how 
>>>> bandwidth, delay and load are mapped to values K1, K2, etc.  If 
>>>> anyone has a good, reliable
>>> reference
>>>> that clears this up can you kindly point me to it.
>>>> 
>>>> Much appreciated
>>>> Kind regards
>>>> jpn
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Free CCIE R&S, Collaboration, Data Center, Wireless & Security Videos ::
>>>> 
>>>> iPexpert on YouTube: www.youtube.com/ipexpertinc
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Free CCIE R&S, Collaboration, Data Center, Wireless & Security Videos ::
>>> 
>>> iPexpert on YouTube: www.youtube.com/ipexpertinc
>> 
>> 
>> ------------------------------
>> 
>> Message: 5
>> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 12:57:18 -0600
>> From: Joey <[email protected]>
>> To: [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] CCIE_RS Digest, Vol 98, Issue 9  EIGRP
>>    Metric Weight.eml
>> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>> 
>> Jim,
>> 
>> This blog post really cleared things up for me.
>> 
>> http://blog.ipexpert.com/2010/03/03/eigrp-metric-k-values/
>> 
>>> On 03/31/2014 10:00 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] EIGRP Metric Weight.eml
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ------------------------------
>> 
>> Message: 6
>> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 16:28:35 -0400
>> From: "Jim Newell" <[email protected]>
>> To: <[email protected]>
>> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] EIGRP Metric Weight.eml
>> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>> 
>> Yes, I had read through that post when this issue came up in the 
>> past. For some reason I did not catch the reference to K1=BW, etc. 
>> Based on what I see the information appears to be accurate. I am 
>> going to go back and find all references to metric weights in the 
>> workbooks and see if it holds true in all cases.
>> 
>> Thanks All for the replies.
>> 
>> Kind regards
>> jpn
>> 
>> ------ Original Message ------
>> Received: 03:01 PM EDT, 03/31/2014
>> From: Joey <[email protected]>
>> To: [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] CCIE_RS Digest, Vol 98, Issue 9  EIGRP 
>> Metric Weight.eml
>> 
>> Jim,
>> 
>> This blog post really cleared things up for me.
>> 
>> http://blog.ipexpert.com/2010/03/03/eigrp-metric-k-values/
>> 
>>> On 03/31/2014 10:00 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] EIGRP Metric Weight.eml
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Free CCIE R&S, Collaboration, Data Center, Wireless & Security Videos ::
>> 
>> iPexpert on YouTube: www.youtube.com/ipexpertinc
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ------------------------------
>> 
>> Message: 7
>> Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2014 14:14:03 +0000
>> From: freddy morales <[email protected]>
>> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
>> Subject: [OSL | CCIE_RS] VOL2 LAB2
>> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Hi, I have a question about task 10.2. The task says to drop any p2p 
>> traffic form VLANC. What I did is that I reused the policy I had 
>> applied to the frame relay outbound interface from a previous task and drop 
>> p2p traffic there.
>> 
>> 
>> But when looking at the solutions I see that the person who solved it 
>> configured a different policy map and applied it inbound on the lan 
>> interface.
>> Probably the best way to do it is applying it on the lan interface 
>> but does it make a difference for the ccie lab since the question 
>> doesn?t specify specifically to do it inbound or outbound?
>> 
>> Thanks!
>>                         
>> 
>> ------------------------------
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Free CCIE R&S, Collaboration, Data Center, Wireless & Security Videos ::
>> 
>> iPexpert on YouTube: www.youtube.com/ipexpertinc
>> 
>> End of CCIE_RS Digest, Vol 99, Issue 1
>> **************************************
>                         
> _______________________________________________
> Free CCIE R&S, Collaboration, Data Center, Wireless & Security Videos ::
> 
> iPexpert on YouTube: www.youtube.com/ipexpertinc
_______________________________________________
Free CCIE R&S, Collaboration, Data Center, Wireless & Security Videos ::

iPexpert on YouTube: www.youtube.com/ipexpertinc
_______________________________________________
Free CCIE R&S, Collaboration, Data Center, Wireless & Security Videos ::

iPexpert on YouTube: www.youtube.com/ipexpertinc

Reply via email to