Good luck. I’ve taken it twice. My best advice is to break every question down into manageable parts. When you see a question that has multiple requirements, it can sometimes be intimidating. But just break the task down into individual configuration items. I’ve found by doing this it makes it much easier to get all the points in a given section.
And don’t get stuck on any given item for too long. I have made this mistake too often. If you have to, hard code something even it doesn’t meet the task requirements. Get it working, move on, but make a note of it and you’ll often see the solution when you come back to correct it. I hope this helps, and good luck!! On Apr 1, 2014, at 12:49 PM, 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/configuration/15-mt/ire-15-mt-book/ire-enhanced-igrp.html#GUID-79D5B9EF-B4D4-4034-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/configuration/15-mt/ire-15-mt-book/ire-enhanced-igrp.html#GUID-79D5B9EF-B4D4-4034-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/configuration/15-mt/ire-15-mt-book/ire-enhanced-igrp.html#GUID-79D5B9EF-B4D4-4034-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/configuration/15-mt/ire-15-mt-book/ire-enhanced-igrp.html#GUID-79D5B9EF-B4D4-4034-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
