well, ok i can see that. but would it be wrong if you did it in 5.3 because it is not mentioned as restriction ?
5.2 i read it as only for the HQ site generaly, i find the questions sometimes "cloudy" > I believe it's because of the previous question, 5.2 . You did not do any > trusting on the switch, instead of remarked all of the packets at the > switch > level; therefore, you were able to trust anything that eventurally got to > the HQ router. Whereas on BR2, nothing could be done at the switch level, > and you did your marking at that level instead. > > HTH > > Ohamien > > On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 9:25 AM, rsmail...@solcon.nl > <rsmail...@solcon.nl>wrote: > >> question on 5.3 >> HQ - BR2 solution >> >> i can't find the reason for the following. >> >> on HQ auto qos voip trust fr-atm is used. >> on BR2 aout qos voip fr-atm is used >> >> why is the "trust" option not used on BR2 ? >> what am i missing in the question/solution. >> >> Ron >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, >> please >> visit www.ipexpert.com >> > _______________________________________________ > For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please > visit www.ipexpert.com > _______________________________________________ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com
