Cabletron [7:4205]
>> BTW, youngen Eric, I was troubleshooting Cabletrons b4 there was Cisco. And >> the relationship? Guess where Cisco and IOS came from? CABLETRON. You learn Hrmm and I wonder where Cabletron commands came from? ::cough cough::UNIX::cough cough:: I suppose Cisco and Cabletron should just close up shop and let Sun, HP, and Red Hat make routers then... Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=4205&t=4205 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
grc.com under a DOS attack [7:7377]
Hrmm... I don't know how much bandwidth the good people at grc have from their ISP, but considering the number of people that have been referred to the site from this list, and considering that the site is unavailable right now, I'd say it looks like Priscilla just engineered a DOS attack on the poor people at grc.com. Poor guys. Maybe I'll get to read the article after the entire networking community gets done reading it. =) Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 23:55:49 -0400 From: "Jennifer Cribbs" Subject: Re: Interesting DOS article [7:7272] That was a very interesting article. I knew things like that went on, but have never had a person experience of such. I liked the detail that was gone into about the solution. I am forwarding the link to friends. Jennifer Cribbs 6/5/2001 9:52:31 PM, "Natasha" wrote: >Somewhat a long read but very enlightening. >The article on Windows XP was just as scary. >Thank you so much Priscilla, I'm going to pass your find on to some >other network folks that could use it. > > >>Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote: >> >> http://grc.com/dos/grcdos.htm >> >> Priscilla >> >> >> >> Priscilla Oppenheimer >> http://www.priscilla.com >-- >Natasha Flazynski >CCNA, MCSE > http://www.ciscobot.com >My Cisco information site. > http://www.botbuilders.com >Artificial Intelligence and Linux development > Have a great day!! Jennifer [GroupStudy.com removed an attachment of type application/ms-tnef which had a name of winmail.dat] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=7377&t=7377 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: grc.com under a DOS attack [7:7377]
Idunno about Priscilla and her DOS attacks... I seem to remember routergod.com taking an awful long time to load once her interview with Fabio was uploaded. Hrrrmmm... -Original Message- From: ElephantChild Sent: Thu 6/7/2001 5:20 AM To: Logan, Harold Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: grc.com under a DOS attack [7:7377] On Wed, 6 Jun 2001, Logan, Harold wrote: > Hrmm... I don't know how much bandwidth the good people at grc have from > their ISP, but considering the number of people that have been referred > to the site from this list, and considering that the site is unavailable > right now, I'd say it looks like Priscilla just engineered a DOS attack > on the poor people at grc.com. Poor guys. Maybe I'll get to read the > article after the entire networking community gets done reading it. > > =) That wouldn't be the first time, I think. That a DOS attack occurs inadvertently, I mean. not that our resident Priscilla engineers one. Look up "slashdot effect" in the Jargon File. -- "Someone approached me and asked me to teach a javascript course. I was about to decline, saying that my complete ignorance of the subject made me unsuitable, then I thought again, that maybe it doesn't, as driving people away from it is a desirable outcome." --Me [GroupStudy.com removed an attachment of type application/ms-tnef which had a name of winmail.dat] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=7537&t=7377 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: CCIE starting pay [7:33899]
No you're not, but what if we rephrase the original question into something slightly more realistic: What about pay for a freshly certified CCIE with no experience doing CCIE level work? It seems like most of the jobs posted for IE's out there are for more of a supervisory and/or design role. When I first started studying for the CCNA, IE's didn't work for less than 6 figures, even the freshly certified ones. That's clearly not the case now... I'm just wondering how bad it is these days. -Original Message- From: Scott M. Trieste [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2002 2:34 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: CCIE starting pay [7:33899] Am I not the only one that is insulted by this question?? ""Joe Carr"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > what would be the average starting pay for CCIE with no work experience. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=33952&t=33899 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: CCIE starting pay [7:33899]
No kidding... those ads are a "truth in advertising" suit waiting to happen. -Original Message- From: John Neiberger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2002 5:50 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: CCIE starting pay [7:33899] I agree that the IT industry is being way overmarketed. I hear an ad running almost every morning for a training company here in Denver. They claim that the average starting salary for newly certified people with no experience is $60k. I'm not sure, but I think they're on crack. :-) John >>> "Oliver Nadalin" 1/31/02 3:09:33 PM >>> I agree with everything said so far...what needs to change is the way Microsoft, and now Cisco and most training providers and study guide publishers advertise the IT industry as a way of making the 'big bucks' - the only people making the big bucks are these guys. People looking for a career change read the hype about how much money can be made becoming an MCSE, CCNA etc so they take courses, study guides, practice exams - with no experience - get the cert then all of a sudden the industry is flooded. I'd like to see something like what Compaq does with the ASE - you can only get the cert if you are working for a Compaq partnerthis would really cut down on the amount of paper certified people. A little heavy handed but i think for the best in the long term - at least protects the integrity of the certification industry and the industry in general. ""Guy"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > A CCIE With no work experience > > I think most employers would shy away from that! A CCNP, or CCNA possible, > but CCIE... Im not sure. That would be like a Brain surgeon with no work > experience... WHat would you pay him to operate on your brain > > Makes you think eh??? I think your best bet is to get a job as a CCNP or > CCNA, get a year or two experience (Minimum) then worry about CCIE. Maybe > work some other certs in there too, like Unix or maybe Microsoft or > something to round you out a bit more and make some opportunities in the > market for yourself... Or firewalls, and or something like tripwire etc... > > My point is, If you have a CCNA, CCNP, CCIE, and 50 other certifications > behind your name, and no work experience, poeple are going to know you are a > good test taker, but you will still be starting off at the bottom. With a > salary range of maybe 30-50k But that CCIE is not going to make it 100k no > matter what your cousins brother or whatever told you. All the > certifications are for is to take someone who has the experience, and > skills, and gives them something they can use as proof of their expertise. > > It is not for an entry level person to get so they can get a higher start > pay... All that does is cheapen the cert. > > Look at the MCSE. Back when I took my MCSE, that cert gave me credibility. I > walked out of every interview with an offer. I could make my own choices. I > took my MCSE after several years of workwith Net systems including Novell, > IBM OS/2, and Microsoft. It was more of a proof of my skill set. Not a proof > I can read Brain Dumps, and hope I will do ok if someone gives me the > chance... > > Now days you mention MCSE, and what goes through your mind??? Thats right > Worthless. > > Now why is that? > > Its because people with no skills heard of someone who became an MCSE, and > started making 70k or whatever... Then that person decided, Hey, I can > do that And found Transcenders etc... Became an M CSE, but cant even > copy files to a floppy > > This happened on a large scale, and soon employers were hiring worthless > MCSEs, and were getting frustrated... > > Now, in the IT industry, it has become a low level Cert... TO me that ticks > me off. Ive been an MCSE since 96, and mine is prrof of the pudding not > a piece of paper... > > Now, Cisco is becoming the same way. Look at how many people are becoming > CCNP...CCNA...etc... How many of those people could configure a medium level > network lab without the directions > > How many could trouble shoot their way out of a paper bag > > If people dont try to really learn the systems, all certifications will be > no better than a 3rd grade diploma! > > sorry for my soap box, just really feel people take these things the wrong > way If people dont wake up, then all of this is for nothing... > > I would not be happy spending a couple thousand dollars to get a 3rd grade > diploma > > > > - Original Message - > From: "Joe Carr" > To: > Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2002 12:26 PM > Subject: CCIE starting pay [7:33899] > > > > what would be the average starting pay for CCIE with no work experience. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=34068&t=33899 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure viola
RE: MAC Address format [7:35203]
Those are both valid MAC formats. Your router's MAC is 00:08:00:50:8d:b2. Same hex digits, different way of writing them. Hal -Original Message- From: Charles Lomotey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 7:08 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Logan, Harold; Charles Lomotey; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: MAC Address format Hi All, I have to a MAC address shown as 0008.0050.8db2 on my cisco and want to block it on my 3com lan switch which has MAC addresses in the format eg. 00:01:03:28:4c:3d How do I convert the Cisco MAC to this other format? Charles _ Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=35203&t=35203 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Secret Clearance? [7:4152]
I disagree. In order to get a clearance, not only do you have to make the right choices, but all of your past and present friends, roomates, and coworkers need to make the right choices too. Add to that, it only takes one person bad-mouthing you to delay or even end your investigation... ask yourself this, is there at least one person out there who would lie about you in order to make your life difficult? It's a very subjective process, and one that I don't care to go through again. If you have a clearance, be glad that you do. Hal -Original Message- From: Jeff Buehler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 6:34 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Secret Clearance? [7:4152] You were not "Lucky" that you had nothing in your background. You made the right choices. People who make the wrong choices pay for it their whole life. It is called Character. ""William Gragido"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Well, since this is obviously a never ending thread I'll add my 2 cents. I > have a Top Secret SCI that is still valid from my active duty period in the > USMC. In regards to joining the service just to get a clearance, I'd say > thats some of the most low brow thinking that I've ever heard. There are no > guarantees that you'll get one. It all depends on the investigation and > what they unearth, so don't be fooled into thinking that simply by selecting > an MOS that requires a clearance you'll automatically qualify. Its not the > case. I saw Marines go through schools only to be turned down for > clearances. I was lucky and had nothing in my background that would > prohibit my from obtaining one, but again, it all depends on what one's > civilian life is compromised of that helps dictates whehter or not a person > rates one. > > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > John Faubion > Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2002 10:34 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Secret Clearance? [7:4152] > > > Ohh that's a good idea, then when you get orders to Bosnia, Somalia, Kuwait, > or Afghanistan, you can be like the whiners of Desert Storm that cried about > joining to get an education, not to go to war. Only this time it will be > about getting a security clearance instead of going to war! > > While you can get a security clearance in the military, it is not valid > after leaving the military unless it is documented correctly. However the > reinstatement cost can be drastically reduced since the previous leg work > has already been done. > > John > > - Original Message - > From: "Steven A. Ridder" > To: > Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2002 7:52 PM > Subject: Re: Secret Clearance? [7:4152] > > > > 80K!!! You could always do what I did and join the Army. If you pick a > > good MOS, you'll get a secret clearance for free while you are in Basic or > > AIT. Some jobs I'm sure will give you a top secret if needed. I bet > just > > joining the reserves would get you a secret if the MOS called for it. > > ""Julian Eccli"" wrote in message > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > A secret clearance can cost somewhere between $50K-$80K to get all the > > > proper paper work and verifications done, hence why they want you to > have > > it > > > already :) > > > > > > > > > -Julian > > > > > > ""Patrick Ramsey"" wrote in message > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > > not to mention that if they say it is required they probably do not > want > > > to > > > > pay the $$$ to have it done...hence the "required" portion of the job > > > > description. > > > > > > > > - > > > > Patrick > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> "Craig Columbus" 02/09/02 15:38 PM >>> > > > > Check the archives of the list. This has been discussed many, many > > times. > > > > > > > > Craig > > > > > > > > At 11:04 AM 2/9/2002 -0500, you wrote: > > > > >So how does one gain Secret Clearance? > > > > >--- Jeff D wrote: > > > > > > The contractor has no say in it. If the government > > > > > > says you need a clearance > > > > > > to enter the building, then you have to have one, > > > > > > period. Why waste your > > > > > > time if you don't? > > > > > > > > > > > > Jeff > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote in message > > > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > > > > > this Clearance thing is kind of funny. > > > > > > > I think they should screen someone who is > > > > > > qulaified for the position even > > > > > > if > > > > > > > they dont have the Clearance. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >= > > > > >Paul M. Immo CCDP, CCNP, CCIE Written, MCSE > > > > >(248)634-3362 Home > > > > >(248)343-0440 Cell > > > > >View my Resume online: http://briefcase.yahoo.com/paulimmo > > > > >Imagination is more important than knowledge > > > > >Albert Einstein > > > > > > > > > >__ > > > > >Do You Yahoo!? > > > > >Send FREE Valentin
RE: VOIP Certification [7:35879]
That's true, the CCNP Specializations are retired. There is however the Cisco IP Telephony Specialist (CIPTS???) which has CCNP certification as a prerequisite. I took the old CVoice exam (VoFR, VoATM, VoIP) to get the CCNP Voice Specialization about a year ago. I used Global Knowledge's "Configuring Cisco Voice over IP" by Elliot Lewis, edited by Keith O'Brien, ISBN 1-928994-03-2. I used it in conjunction with various docs on cisco's page, and that was enough to pass the exam, combined with the experience I had at the time. There are probably better publications out there nowadays, if nothing else because they're more up-to-date. I haven't taken the CIPT or QOS exams, and I don't know if the current CVoice is the same exam as the old one. I thought about taking the other two exams to get the Telephony specialization, but my CCNP Voice specialization doesn't expire for another year, and my lab date is in July. Good luck, Hal -Original Message- From: Jason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 3:16 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: VOIP Certification [7:35879] Last I check, there is any CCNP specialisation track anymore !! ;-) ""Kelley Allen"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Has anyone out there attempted the CIPT, CVOICE, and QOS tests yet for the > CCNP / Voice Specialization certification? If so, what training did you use > and what was the tone of the tests? > > Thanks, > Kelley. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=35901&t=35879 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: what is wrong with the job market ? [7:35611]
As far as I'm concerned, the training centers are the ones driving the getaway car on this one. I don't mean all of them, by any means... but if you work for a training center and find yourself getting offended by that statement, ask yourself this: Has your organization ever done a marketing campaign targeting non-technical people telling them they can attend a bootcamp and line up a job making (insert exorbitant salary here) a year? If so, then your organization is part of the problem. Mind you, I work at a community college, and we teach Windows 2000 courses and Cisco courses, but at no point have we (including our marketing department) ever exaggerated the state of the job market to lure students in with the promise of a $70,000 salary after a week-long bootcamp. We tell them they'll need to get their degree, their certifications, and their hands-on experience (internships, entry-level work, volunteer work, etc) and even then, the paycheck isn't going to be what they hear on the radio. The only reason the CCNA and MCSE bootcamps are still around is because people are gullible. I foresee a lot more of them closing their doors within the next year, it's inevitable. They'll just join the dot-bombs and the dinosaurs. -Original Message- From: Hire, Ejay [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 1:41 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: what is wrong with the job market ? [7:35611] Hey, In my spare time I do blacksmith work. You'd be surprised what stuff'll go for on Ebay. :) -Original Message- From: Tom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, February 18, 2002 10:29 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: what is wrong with the job market ? [7:35611] Back in the 1800's a Blacksmith was a well paid man, highly respected and had a skill few did. What about that guy that made buggy whips around 1905? Where is he now? Let's face it. Skills like ours are only valueable when few have them. Once too many people have them, they get devalued. Eventually working in IT will be a "regular" job, without great pay and benefits. Ride it out if you still have a good job, but make sure you save up for when you don't. Tom -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of nrf Sent: Monday, February 18, 2002 9:50 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: what is wrong with the job market ? [7:35611] ""Steven A. Ridder"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > That article taked about 1 problem, the problem almost every company had - > grabing too much land and equipment with no customers or sustainable > revenue. But that's also the problem every dot-bomb had. Thankfully the > buble burst, the madness ended and took out the garbage. No company would > stay in business that way. This dosen't mean that their services weren't > wanted. Most every home who has a dial-up, most buisinesses that don't have > DSL in their area are still waiting for the right company/technology to come > by and at the right price. I'm afraid I have to disagree. The simple fact is that in many cases, the services were in fact not wanted, at least at the price points they were offered at, but then of course if they were offered at lower price points, there would have been even less profit than there already was. And the fact is, despite all the hype from New Economy providers, there is not a huge outcry of demand for high-speed access. There is some demand, but nowhere near the demand that a lot of people thought there would be. I used to believe otherwise. Because I'm always doing stuff on the Net, and therefore I rely on my broadband, I assumed that there must have been ravenous demand for broadband connections. I assumed that everybody was like me. Wrongo. The fact is that there is only a small subset of the population that is tech and computer savvy and can honestly feel the difference between a broadband link and standard dialup, certainly enough that they would feel the need to pay extra for broadband. The numbers say otherwise. In the past, broadband was not widely available, but not this is not so. It is estimated that well over 70% of households within the US have access to some kind of broadband (cable/DSL/satellite/fixed wireless). (70% of all U.S. households have access to high-speed cable, and I'm not even talking about the other kinds of broadband - http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/broadband/comments2/Napster.htm, ) Yet a sobering fact is that even where broadband is available, consumer demand has been low: "...even where there is deployment of broadband infrastructure, there has been low consumer uptake...Groups such as the Consumer Energy Council of America and the National Cable Television Association have also noted the slow uptake of consumer use of DSL and cable modems even where currently deployed." http://www.digitaldividenetwork.org/content/stories/index.cfm?key=10 Perhaps the most sobering is th
RE: What after CCNA?? [7:36215]
The CCDA is only one more exam and gets you another certification. I'm sure it's possible to pass the CCNP without access to lab equipment, but you'd be doing yourself a huge disservice by attempting it. If you want to go after the CCNP exams, consider looking for a CCNP Network Academy site in your area. You'll almost always end up paying less then you would for a CCNP bootcamp, and since most CCNP academies are community colleges, you may be able to swing financial aid as well. There's an academy locator at http://cisco.netacad.net. Good luck, Hal -Original Message- From: Gandre Amit [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, February 22, 2002 10:47 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: What after CCNA?? [7:36215] Hi I got through my CCNA yesterday and I am looking forward to taking other certifications. I had the CCDA and CCNP in mind. I am not sure though which one to take. Also, if there is a Cisco certification that deals with Security, I would like to do that. Another factor is that, I do not have the money to pay for any courses and so this is going to be self study. Woudl anyone recommend doing CCNP or any higher security certification without a course or access to a lab.. BTW has anyone taken the SSCP and if so what books did u use.. Please advice. Amit Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=36226&t=36215 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Comcast telnet session problem [7:37080]
I don't have an aswer for your timeout problems... but unless Comcast revamps their IP addressing, your router will continue to get thje same IP Address assigned by DHCP. The only way to get a different one would be to leave it powered off for a while, then fire it back up. Hal -Original Message- From: Lan Wong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, March 02, 2002 1:27 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Comcast telnet session problem [7:37080] Hi Group, I have recently connected my home lab via Comcast. Why does my telnet session always timed out after few minutes of inactivity ? Both my console and vty 0 4 have been setted to timeout = 0 0. I know the ip address from Comcast did not renewed because after I reloaded the router, I get the same ip. Is this a Comcast thing or am I missing some commands ? My hardware is 2611 w/nm-16a Thanks, LW _ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=37081&t=37080 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: The CCNA exam has changed effective 3-12-02 [7:37960]
The simulation that's on the web page is from a POS simulator they did for the Network Academies; I doubt that's the same simulator that will wind up on the tests. I looked around in the certification online support and found this: Command Lines Question What is the proper way to enter command lines during Cisco Career Certification exams? Answer There are many ways to enter command lines into actual Cisco Routers. The exam will accept all IOS commands and partial responses that an actual Cisco Router will understand. For example: 'Show Config' or 'Sho Config' or 'Sh Conf' - would be acceptable. 'Router # show ip protocol' or 'router # show ip prot' - would be acceptable. The commands must include the correct spacing, spelling and marks (#@!). I'd post a link, but it's through their "RightNow" deal and the word wrap would pretty much kill it. If you want to read it, go to the online support page at: http://ciscocert.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/ciscocert.cfg/php/enduser/home.php (watch the wrap) and search for "enter command lines". hth, Hal -Original Message- From: sam sneed [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 12:54 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: The CCNA exam has changed effective 3-12-02 [7:37960] I tried the simulation and it makes you type out every single command. No abreviations and no "?" allowed. Thats is retarded. If there going to make their simulation they should do it right, it is their software they're simulating. I'd like to see anyone doing any half decent config without using tab completion or "?". My thoughts are that its a great idea, and should be applied to the CCNP too, but the simulation should be as accurate as possible.If they're going to be half-assed about it don't do it at all. ""Andy Barkl"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > The CCNA exam 640-507 has been replaced by 640-607 and now includes > software simulation questions requiring you to configure a network. > > http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/10/wwtraining/whats_new/ Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=38010&t=37960 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: CCNP exams [7:38097]
No worries Brian. I started the CCNP track when it was in the 400's, and in that case you could "mix and match" the exams to complete the cert. I took the 400 versions of the switching and remote access exams and the 500 versions of routing and support. If Cisco follows suit with this one, you should be able to continue with your CCNP exams without any trouble; I highly doubt you'll have to re-take any of them. -Original Message- From: Robert Fowler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 10:28 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: CCNP exams [7:38097] Brian, It's a 3 year timer, not a two year timer for recertification. I got the certification to compliment my experience, not to say that I know what I'm doing because I have the CCNP certification. Those people that get it and are entry level will be weeded out by hiring managers. Those that have experience AND the certification can stand on their own from a hiring managers standpoint. Even the certification and experience do not make that person an expert. The CCNP exams CAN be passed by less than par individuals. That said, that is why there is a high-level certification. The CCIE, which when combined with real experience (pretty much required to pass), proves you are the cream of the crop. CCNA shows you want more and have started to learn the basics of routing. CCNP shows you have at least a basic knowledge of how things work. I don't think it shows that you can implement it. You need to have the experience to back up the certification to show you can implement it. The CCIE can pretty much be taken at face value, because almost anyone who has the certification has the experience anyway, but in order to pass the lab you have to prove something more. All the other certs simply pull you apart from other candidates if you have a reasonable amount of real-world experience. Robert -Original Message- From: Brian Zeitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 9:56 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: CCNP exams [7:38097] My comment is with the CCNP exams. When I started it was the 500 series, which was not long ago, now its changing to the 600 series. For some people it takes a while to pass a CCNP exam, so I have not had enough time to get a lot done in the 500 series, let alone switch to 600. I know the 600 is not out yet, but still. Also here is a question, why would someone want to take the last exam in the CCNP series, because when you take the last exam, your 2 year timer starts ticking. Where is the motivation there? I think I am just going to work on the course SNIPPED Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=38109&t=38097 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Who is Priscilla Oppenheimer ? [7:38662]
Dave, You can read more about her at www.priscilla.com. Among other accomplishments, she wrote "Top-Down Network Design," which I used to prepare for and pass both the CCDA exam and the CID. She, along with a few other "regulars" in this forum, frequently answers our questions without any form of compensation, except of course for the gratitude and respect of the group. No doubt you were writing this email to thank her for doing so. Hal Logan CCAI, CCDP, CCNP+Voice Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty Computing & Engineering Technology Manatee Community College ps- I've also heard that she taught Fabio how to route with IGRP, but I can't back that up with paperwork... pps- Incidentally, I noticed that she's not listed on the "Cisco Press Authors" page on the website... odd. -Original Message- From: dk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 10:51 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Who is Priscilla Oppenheimer ? [7:38662] Who is this mystery woman .. who seems to know everything ! Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=38679&t=38662 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Who is Priscilla Oppenheimer ? [7:38662]
No kidding, the art on the ciscopress books doesn't do networkers any justice at all. If nothing else, they should draw the guy on the copvers so he fits the techy demographic better: He should have some form of facial hair, he should be slightly overweight, he should have a cigarette in one hand and coffee (or mountain dew) in the other, and there's no way he should be wearing a tie, especially while trying to troubleshoot a connectivity problem. (Possible exception: the "Ties Suck" tie on thinkgeek.com) As for the women on the covers, they should somehow be depicted as presenting the solution for whatever problem the guy is working on, with the alpha male stubbornly ignoring them. (Wonder how many flames I'll get for this one?) Cheers, Hal -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 5:14 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Who is Priscilla Oppenheimer ? [7:38662] "I hear that in addition to her network design work and training she's also doing some modeling for book covers on the side. ;-)" Oh good, I am *so* sick of all those chunky men with rolled-up sleeves on the Cisco Press books. Priscilla - even a digitised and modified version - has *got* to be better. ;-) (Priscilla's going to be doing a lot of paying out...) JMcL - Forwarded by Jenny Mcleod/NSO/CSDA on 19/03/2002 09:08 am - "John Neiberger" Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 19/03/2002 04:11 am Please respond to "John Neiberger" To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject:RE: Who is Priscilla Oppenheimer ? [7:38662] For a real insight into Priscilla, take a look at her interview with Fabio at www.routergod.com. I hear that in addition to her network design work and training she's also doing some modeling for book covers on the side. ;-) (I know I'm going to pay for that later) John >>> "William Gragido" 3/18/02 9:50:10 AM >>> LOL. Hey Priscilla, who are you anyways ;-) What was the name of that book you authored? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of dk Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 9:51 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Who is Priscilla Oppenheimer ? [7:38662] Who is this mystery woman .. who seems to know everything ! Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=38773&t=38662 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Appreciate Your Expertise On This Strange ARP Problem [7:38778]
Did you get a chance to take a look at the IP configuration of your DHCP clients? Router A could have been sending out proxy ARP's (like you already mentioned) and possibly ICMP redirects to your workstations. Without the default route, and with the wrong subnet mask, the A router's routing table looks like this: C 10.67.2.0/24 S 10.67.1.0/24 Without the default route, the A router doesn't have routes for 10.67.7.x or 10.67.8.x. If the A router is replying when your workstations ARP for your servers, then your workstations are sending out packets with a destination IP address of your server, but with a destination MAC of the A router's ethernet interface. The A router has routes to your servers, so there's no problem there, except of course for inefficiency. When your servers send replies back to router A however, the router has no route back to your workstations. It did when the default route was in place, but without it the A router has no return path. That sounds far fetched, but I can't think of another explanation that fits your description of the problem. If you find yourself in such a situation again, fire up a protocol analyzer and compare destination MACs with destination IP addresses, and you'll get a better picture of what's going on. hth, Hal -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 7:42 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Appreciate Your Expertise On This Strange ARP Problem [7:38738] Hi there This is my first time to post a question. Here is a real scenario which happened a few days ago. Though the problem has been resolved, i still cannot understand what the cause is. Customer A has a partner connection to B's network. due to lack of capability on B's Router/Firewall, one of A's router is plugged directly onto B's internal LAN(sounds silly, but it is true). B's LAN use 10.67.0.0/16 address, of which 10.67.1.x is for servers, 10.67.2.x for routers/switches, 10.67.7.x and 10.67.8.x for DHCP clients. B's router has 10.67.2.1 addr. A's router on B's LAN gets assigned an ip addr 10.67.2.2,but a wrong /24 mask was given by B. since A's users need to talk to B's server, a static route(ip route 10.67.1.0 255.255.255.0 10.67.2.1) was added. A default route is also configured(ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.67.2.1) on the A's router. when this default route was taken off(no obvious reason to point a default route to B's default router), all B's dhcp clients cannot talk to their own servers(10.67.1.x) any more even they are on the same subnet. B's network support was called in, and they found that the A's router is incorrectly answering ARP requests(by default ip proxy-arp is enabled on the LAN interface). and somehow the arp respone reaches the client before the server's, so the client cannot talk to the servers. the problem later was resolved by rectifying the subnet mask on A's router. but i still cannot figure out what went wrong when the default route on A's router was removed. I'll be much appreciated if anyone can shed some lights on this. regards Alec Shi Senior Support Engineer Axon Computertime Auckland NZ -- The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the use of the person or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is CONFIDENTIAL and may be exempt from disclosure under applicable laws. If you read this message and are not the addressee you are notified that use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this message is prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately and delete the original message. You should scan this message and any attached files for viruses. Axon Computertime accepts no liability for any loss caused either directly or indirectly by a virus arising from the use of this message or any attached file. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=38778&t=38778 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Problem with RIF [7:38569]
Dennis, Thanks for the useful info. I used your boson test to pass the Written a while back... I like to think I would have passed it without your test, but I was much more confident at the testing center for having bought the test. I highly recommend it for anyone getting ready for the written. In your Corrections to the Brainbuzz CCIE Written Cramsession, you mentioned IPX split horizon. I've been able to enable it for ipx eigrp, but not for ipx rip. Has anyone dealt with split horizon on ipx rip networks? I'll be labbing up some ipx stuff tonight, so I'll look at some routing updates and see if split horizon is actually taking effect or not. I've been wrestling with NLSP lately and found it to be a pain, and of course the docs on cisco's site are ever-so helpful... anyone get any recommendations for an ipx bible? Hal Logan CCAI, CCDP, CCNP+Voice Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty Computing & Engineering Technology Manatee Community College -Original Message- From: Dennis Laganiere [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 1:43 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Problem with RIF [7:38569] I finally put up a website so people could grab the document. You'll find it at www.laganiere.net... I hope it helps... Thanks... --- Dennis -Original Message- From: Dennis Laganiere Sent: Saturday, March 16, 2002 5:00 PM To: 'Juan Blanco'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Problem with RIF [7:38569] Convert the length to decimal (0x11000 = 24, and 0x00110 = 6). Count the number of bytes the RIF is (hint - each hex character is one byte, so there are two bytes for the RC, and two more for each RD). Since the first problem has a length of 24 bytes defined, but an actual length of 8 bytes, it's invalid.. Since the second problem has a length of 6 bytes defined, but an actual length of 8 bytes, it's invalid too... Attached is a document I put together some time ago to help people with RIFs, hopefully you will find it useful. Group members won't get the attachment, but I'll try and post it on a web site for you to download later tonight... Thanks all... --- Dennis Laganiere Author of Boson CCIE Written #3 and the NLI study guide for the CCIE Written -Original Message- From: Juan Blanco [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, March 16, 2002 3:55 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Problem with RIF [7:38569] Team, The following RIF are invalid because the length specified in the RIF differs from the actual length of the RIF. Can someone explain... example 1 RIF d820.0123.0321.0050 TYPERIF LENGTH DIRECTION FRAME LENGHT NOT USED 110 11000 0 010 How do you know that the rif length is different from the actual length of the RIF (what are we counting here) example 2 RIF 0630.0011.0191.0030 TYPERIF LENGTH DIRECTION FRAME LENGHT NOT USED 000 00110 0 011 How do you know that the rif length different from the actual lengthf the RIF (what are we counting here) Thanks, JB Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=38946&t=38569 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: What is bandwidth domain? [7:38887]
Every host in an ethernet collision domain is in contention for the bandwidth, so the term is accurate. As for why the term exists, it wouldn't be appropriate to refer to a token ring or fddi segment as a collision domain, ergo the term bandwidth domain. hth, Hal -Original Message- From: Love Cisco [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 9:45 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: What is bandwidth domain? [7:38887] I only know broadcast domain and collision doman. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=38947&t=38887 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Are all the Cisco jobs for CCIEs? [7:40328]
I don't mean to offend anyone, but the job market doesn't owe anyone a job, and I include myself with that statement. Right now a CCNA or NP with little or no experience is going to have as much luck selling that skillset as a street vendor selling "September 11th - We will not forget" stickers. There was a heavy demand for them 6 months ago, but there's hardly any demand for them now. If you don't think that analogy applies to IT, then there are some COBOL programmers I'd like to introduce you to. Face it, there is little if any demand forpeople with just a CCNA, or even an NP without much work experience. I feel bad for you, I really do. So adapt; look to see what there is a demand for, and more importantly what there will be a demand for, and work towards fitting that mold. Sorry if I sound bitter, but here's my perspective - every year my school kicks out at least a dozen CCNA's, and that's considered low. Original Message- From: Lomker, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wed 4/3/2002 2:49 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Subject: RE: Are all the Cisco jobs for CCIEs? [7:40328] > How do I get a job that works with Cisco products, > without alot of experience or a CCIE? No kidding and good luck. Even when the economy was good I couldn't find a job. If you have a BSEE your odds are a lot better, but my business degree didn't get me anywhere. My current position is 75% NT and 25% Cisco. You might have to find a job like mine at a company that will give you some exposure to the Cisco equipment. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=40390&t=40328 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Are all the Cisco jobs for CCIEs? [7:40328]
x, I apologize if my email insinuated that you aren't talented or qualified; that wasn't my intent. I applaud your motives for pursuing the IE; they aren't far from my own. I think you should be prepared though, as should I, to find out after we get our numbers that the CCIE is going to be listed for many jobs as a minimum requirement. The job market is governed by supply and demand; it always has been, it always will be. The demand for IE's has dropped, while the supply is steadily increasing. Good luck with your job hunt, and likewise I hope your lab goes well. Have you set a date yet? -Original Message- From: x [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thu 4/4/2002 12:29 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Subject: RE: Are all the Cisco jobs for CCIEs? [7:40328] I guess I wasn't completely clear in my original post. I am not a recent CCNA graduate with no experience in the field or a "street vendor"(this one is pretty funny to me living in New York). I am looking for Cisco career advice. Judging from the responses, I am not the only person who wants to make the leap from a job that is part time Cisco to full time Cisco. I have been in the IT field for 6 years and moved from desktop, to Novell, to NT, to Unix. I passed the CNE and got a junior Novell position. I passed the MCSE and then got a junior position. I worked on learning OpenBSD, FreeBSD, Solaris, and Redhat Linux and got a NT/Unix job that included Cisco switches, a vpn concentrator, a PIX and a PIX to PIX vpn. I also passed the CCDA, CCNA, CCNP, and the CCIE written. I am planning on taking the CCDP and CSS-1 before finishing my CCIE. I have my own home lab complete with 6 routers and a Catalyst 5000. I would like to get more hands on Cisco experience in the real world before I try the CCIE Lab. I am in a position now where I am certified to a degree, have some experience, and a home lab. Usually at this point I can land a junior position and get real experience to move into a senior position. It just seems like a huge gap in the job market. All the job ads from Hotjobs, monster, and headhunter are looking for Cisco people are asking for CCIE's or people with 5+ years experience. These people had to get that experience somewhere and there must be Cisco positions that don't require a CCIE. I am going to go out on a limb assuming there are company's with 10 to 20 routers or resellers that need CCNPs or companies that can't afford to hire a CCIE, but need Cisco help. Where are these jobs posted? Do I need to know a secret handshake? hehe If you are a CCIE or have 5+ years Cisco experience how did you get it(Priscilla Openhiemer might have spelled that wrong or any other CCIEs or highly experienced people on the list)? I would like to hear your story of how you "made it." Maybe it can give me an idea of what I need to do. This brings me to why I want to be a CCIE. I first heard the CCIE was the most difficult certification to achieve when I was just starting in networking. I was told the CCIE Lab is almost impossible and there were only about 5,000 CCIEs compared to 80,000 MCSEs or CNEs. I was hooked. Its not about the money, because anyone can make plenty of money just doing Microsoft, Novell and/or Unix with alot less effort. It isn't because Cisco is "hot." Its because this is the biggest challenge in networking and when I do something I want to be the best. -Original Message- From: Logan, Harold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 4:24 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Are all the Cisco jobs for CCIEs? [7:40328] I don't mean to offend anyone, but the job market doesn't owe anyone a job, and I include myself with that statement. Right now a CCNA or NP with little or no experience is going to have as much luck selling that skillset as a street vendor selling "September 11th - We will not forget" stickers. There was a heavy demand for them 6 months ago, but there's hardly any demand for them now. If you don't think that analogy applies to IT, then there are some COBOL programmers I'd like to introduce you to. Face it, there is little if any demand forpeople with just a CCNA, or even an NP without much work experience. I feel bad f
Passed CCIE Written, life is good [7:26584]
Ok this is a little long, but I figure by writing this now I can save the trouble of answering the dozens of "What books did you read" and "What software did you use" questions. If you've already passed the written, or if you don't care what I did to pass, then hit delete. Took the CCIE Written yesterday... not necessarily because I felt I was ready for it, but more because I was sick of studying for it. All in all it was a challenging exam... I needed a 70 to pass, and I got a 77. I was kinda hoping to score in the high 80's at least, but a pass is a pass right? As another netacad instructor once pointed out to me, "When you go to the doctor's office, you see his diploma on the wall... but you don't see his GPA anywhere do you?" As for my prep work... I used Sybex's CCIE book by Todd Lammle and John Swartz as a basis for my studying, and cross-referenced with Caslow, Giles, and the CCIE professional development books when necessary. The Sybex CCIE book has taken flack on these lists in the past, and I will agree with other posters: there are several errors in the book, especially in some of the sample questions. Historically, Sybex has been very good about posting errata in their books on their web page... I didn't check for this book though, partially because I knew any errors would come up in my cross-referencing, and partially out of laziness =) I consider the Lammle/Swartz book a worthy investment though; a month ago I had practically 0 experience or knowledge of reading and interpretting RIF's or working with multicast protocols. One of the down sides of some of the more detailed books out there is that they contain so much information that a subject you know nothing about can be intimidating. For example, I THOUGHT I knew ethernet until I read the ethernet chapter in Giles' book. Reading a book like his to learn about something you know little about is painful at best, and fruitless at worst. The Sybex book does an excellent job of explaining the underlying concepts in english, giving you a foundation to build on. I also bought one of the Boson CCIE tests yesterday and went through it for a few hours before I took the test. Let me say, that was the second best $40 dollars I've spent on this test. (The best $40 was the bar tab I racked up last night) The questions in the Boson test were very challenging, many of them more challenging than the Written. I'm pretty sure, I wouldn't have passed without it. I had one other resource backing me up, I teach the Cisco Networking Academy classes. Believe it or not, knowing the CCNA netacad curriculum forwards and backwards contributed greatly to my success on the exam. Anyways, enough babbling... after taking a short break I need to start getting ready for the lab. I don't post much on here (usually because the few questions I'm qualified to answer, get answered six times before I can hit the Reply button), but I want to thank everyone on the list; I've learned a lot from your questions and your answers. Cheers, Hal - CCAI, CCDP, CCNP+Voice Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=26584&t=26584 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: advice on CCNP exams [7:26850]
I started taking the CCNP exams under the 1.0 versions. I took the CLSC (Switching), CMTD (RAS) and failed the ACRC (Routing) exams, then the switch happened. I then took the Routing exam, and the old ACRC made the routing exam I took look like a walk in the park. After that, the Support exam wasn't challenging at all. It wouldn't surprise me if Cisco decided to increase the difficulty on those exams. Hal Logan Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty Computing and Engineering Technology Manatee Community College > -Original Message- > From: Brian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 10:07 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: advice on CCNP exams [7:26850] > > > For all those people who are starting CCNP, I have some > advice for you. Dont > be discouraged by all the people telling you they got a 990 > on every exam. > That was then, and this is now. I new price of 125 (Nov 11th) for test > indicates that things have changed very much. I say this because Cisco > states the 125 is for the cost of changing the exams. I have > just heard from > friends that took it and that alot of their friends are > failing. I have > failed CCNP Routing as well just recently. > > The number of CCNPs has increased this year, by 100% since > the following > year, I think that trend is coming to a screaching halt. > > How to study, it should be common sense, which i dont have > much of :) Print > out the study guideline from Cisco, and know everything they mention > forwards and backwards. Obviously OSPF, BGP. If you have any > study guides, > dont really put much stock in them there not worth 2c > anymore. I suggest > exam cram for a basic idea of what its about, and cisco press > to look up the > things that are hard to understand. And maybe sybex if you > want to read the > entire book :) I think some of the questions on Boson go > overboard, but that > might be what you need. I guess it cant hurt to know too > much. Boson is now > only good for learning what type of questions are on the exam, not THE > actual questions on the exam anymore. > > Brian Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=26857&t=26850 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: EXAM CRAM 350-001 is good??? [7:26781]
I've never been a fan of the Exam Crams used as the core of my studying. To their credit though, they're short and sweet. A day or two before I take an exam sometimes I'll burn through an examcram book, and if I read something that I couldn't add three or four more sentences to, then I know that's a topic I still need work on. I have the R&S exam cram, and there's nothing wrong with it, I just prefer to use other books for my actual studying. Hal Logan Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty Computing and Engineering Technology Manatee Community College > -Original Message- > From: Joselito Nuqez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 7:46 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: EXAM CRAM 350-001 is good??? [7:26781] > > > Joselito Nuqez wrote: > > > > > > > Joselito Nuqez wrote: > > > >> And EXAM CRAM 350-001 for the CCIE > >> > >> is good > >> > >> Joselito Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=26859&t=26781 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Passed CCIE Written, life is good [7:26584]
I would rate the IE written as much more difficult than the CCNP Exams, and slightly more difficult than the CID exam. Hal Logan Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty Computing and Engineering Technology Manatee Community College > -Original Message- > From: Henk Wolf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2001 8:50 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Passed CCIE Written, life is good [7:26584] > > > Tnx for the feedback. > Did you do CCNP / CCDP as well? > If so how do these exams compare to the Written CCIE? Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=26862&t=26584 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Boson Tests border on Unethical [7:26639]
I thought about that after I took the exam, but there was something else I noticed when taking the boson tests. Try taking one of the more popular CCIE prep books, or maybe even the CCIE Professional Development books, and go through a section. (Not a chapter, but one section of a chapter). Then, try to think of 5 questions you could ask someone that would test their comprehension of that section. I'm willing to bet that 4 of those 5 questions you thought of will show up, worded slightly differently, on the boson tests, and 1 or 2 of those 5 questions are in the test bank for the written. Just my .02 > -Original Message- > From: Gardner, Brent [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2001 11:07 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Boson Tests border on Unethical [7:26639] > > > I too recently passed my written CCIE. I would go so far to > say that the > Boson tests push the limits in terms of ethical test > preparation. I would > say there were approximately five questions on the practice > exams that were > right out of the Cisco test. Most of these questions were > worded almost > exactly the same as they were in the CCIE written and the > material they > touched on was pretty esoteric. > > Brent Gardner Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=26863&t=26639 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Passed CCIE Written, life is good [7:26584]
I used Test #2. > -Original Message- > From: Nick Lesewski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2001 1:10 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Passed CCIE Written, life is good [7:26584] > > > You said you used one of the bosons and it was great... Which > one was it, > 1,2 or 3? > > >From: "Logan, Harold" > >Reply-To: "Logan, Harold" > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Subject: Passed CCIE Written, life is good [7:26584] > >Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 12:40:12 -0500 > > > >Ok this is a little long, but I figure by writing this now I can save > >the trouble of answering the dozens of "What books did you read" and > >"What software did you use" questions. If you've already passed the > >written, or if you don't care what I did to pass, then hit delete. > > > >Took the CCIE Written yesterday... not necessarily because I > felt I was > >ready for it, but more because I was sick of studying for > it. All in all > >it was a challenging exam... I needed a 70 to pass, and I got a 77. I > >was kinda hoping to score in the high 80's at least, but a pass is a > >pass right? As another netacad instructor once pointed out > to me, "When > >you go to the doctor's office, you see his diploma on the wall... but > >you don't see his GPA anywhere do you?" > > > >As for my prep work... I used Sybex's CCIE book by Todd > Lammle and John > >Swartz as a basis for my studying, and cross-referenced with Caslow, > >Giles, and the CCIE professional development books when > necessary. The > >Sybex CCIE book has taken flack on these lists in the past, > and I will > >agree with other posters: there are several errors in the book, > >especially in some of the sample questions. Historically, > Sybex has been > >very good about posting errata in their books on their web page... I > >didn't check for this book though, partially because I knew > any errors > >would come up in my cross-referencing, and partially out of > laziness =) > >I consider the Lammle/Swartz book a worthy investment though; a month > >ago I had practically 0 experience or knowledge of reading and > >interpretting RIF's or working with multicast protocols. One > of the down > >sides of some of the more detailed books out there is that > they contain > >so much information that a subject you know nothing about can be > >intimidating. For example, I THOUGHT I knew ethernet until I read the > >ethernet chapter in Giles' book. Reading a book like his to > learn about > >something you know little about is painful at best, and fruitless at > >worst. The Sybex book does an excellent job of explaining > the underlying > >concepts in english, giving you a foundation to build on. > > > >I also bought one of the Boson CCIE tests yesterday and went > through it > >for a few hours before I took the test. Let me say, that was > the second > >best $40 dollars I've spent on this test. (The best $40 was > the bar tab > >I racked up last night) The questions in the Boson test were very > >challenging, many of them more challenging than the Written. > I'm pretty > >sure, I wouldn't have passed without it. > > > >I had one other resource backing me up, I teach the Cisco Networking > >Academy classes. Believe it or not, knowing the CCNA netacad > curriculum > >forwards and backwards contributed greatly to my success on the exam. > > > >Anyways, enough babbling... after taking a short break I > need to start > >getting ready for the lab. I don't post much on here (usually because > >the few questions I'm qualified to answer, get answered six > times before > >I can hit the Reply button), but I want to thank everyone on > the list; > >I've learned a lot from your questions and your answers. > > > >Cheers, > >Hal - CCAI, CCDP, CCNP+Voice > _ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at > http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=26864&t=26584 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Passed CCIE Written, life is good [7:26584]
My logic has always been, if someone can afford to take any cert exam 8 times, and doesn't mind losing the money, then odds are they're financially well-off enough that they can just retire now and get it over with. Now that the written costs $300 US, taking the written 8 times would cost $2400, and taking the lab eight times would cost over 9 grand. That's a lot of beer money to go donating to Cisco... Hal Logan Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty Computing and Engineering Technology Manatee Community College > -Original Message- > From: Bullock, Jason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 11:48 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Passed CCIE Written, life is good [7:26584] > > > True, the written exam is tough, but really all about > understanding rif and > dlsw technologies. From there it comes down to memorizing > the questions and > taking the test a few times. I know guys that took that > thing over 8 times > in a row, just to pass it. I just got lucky and happened to > pass it on the > first time. Been a few months, and still have not scheduled > the daunting > lab though. > > jason > > -Original Message- > From: Logan, Harold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 11:23 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Passed CCIE Written, life is good [7:26584] > > > I would rate the IE written as much more difficult than the > CCNP Exams, > and slightly more difficult than the CID exam. > > Hal Logan > Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty > Computing and Engineering Technology > Manatee Community College > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Henk Wolf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2001 8:50 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: Passed CCIE Written, life is good [7:26584] > > > > > > Tnx for the feedback. > > Did you do CCNP / CCDP as well? > > If so how do these exams compare to the Written CCIE? Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=26883&t=26584 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Boson Tests border on Unethical [7:26639]
Interesting observation. I don't think Cisco would even care if a company was putting out test questions that matched the exam... after all, if less qualified people try and fail at the lab, that's just easy money for them anyway. Either way, I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. I'm just going to make sure I'm not "easy money". Hal > -Original Message- > From: Kaminski, Shawn G [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 12:46 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Boson Tests border on Unethical [7:26639] > > > It's easy to see what's happening here. All of Boson's tests > are done by > different authors. Each author is going to try like hell to get their > questions as close as possible to the questions on the actual > exams, if not > right from the exams. Boson doesn't care because they state > right in their > author contract that they are not responsible for exams that contain > questions that break the NDA. The author will be held > responsible. It's not > like Boson's going to double-check every authored exam for > NDA violations. > Anyway, the closer the author comes to the actual exam > questions, the more > exams he'll sell when word gets around that, for example, > "Boson Test #2 is > the one you need to get". However, Boson isn't doing anything > different than > any other company selling certification practice exams. It's > a ridiculously > huge, cut-throat, and competitive market out there for study > materials. > > Shawn > > -Original Message- > From: Logan, Harold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 11:28 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Boson Tests border on Unethical [7:26639] > > > I thought about that after I took the exam, but there was > something else I > noticed when taking the boson tests. Try taking one of the > more popular CCIE > prep books, or maybe even the CCIE Professional Development > books, and go > through a section. (Not a chapter, but one section of a > chapter). Then, try > to think of 5 questions you could ask someone that would test their > comprehension of that section. I'm willing to bet that 4 of those 5 > questions you thought of will show up, worded slightly > differently, on the > boson tests, and 1 or 2 of those 5 questions are in the test > bank for the > written. > > Just my .02 > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Gardner, Brent [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2001 11:07 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Boson Tests border on Unethical [7:26639] > > > > > > I too recently passed my written CCIE. I would go so far to > > say that the > > Boson tests push the limits in terms of ethical test > > preparation. I would > > say there were approximately five questions on the practice > > exams that were > > right out of the Cisco test. Most of these questions were > > worded almost > > exactly the same as they were in the CCIE written and the > > material they > > touched on was pretty esoteric. > > > > Brent Gardner Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=26888&t=26639 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Passed CCIE Written, life is good [7:26584]
The most recent info I have is that the lab must be completed 18 months from when you take the written. I don't know if you get another 18 months when you attempt the lab, maybe someone else has an answer on that one. Hal Logan Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty Computing and Engineering Technology Manatee Community College > -Original Message- > From: Mirza, Timur [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 1:26 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Passed CCIE Written, life is good [7:26584] > > > do u have to recertify on the written after 3 yrs? i passed > the written in > 1/2000 & since then, i've attempted the lab 4x...i'm going to > attempt the > lab as many times as i can before the written recertification > (in 1/2003), > after that, sad to say but i'm planning to give up...it just > ain't worth it > > -Original Message- > From: Logan, Harold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 9:47 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Passed CCIE Written, life is good [7:26584] > > My logic has always been, if someone can afford to take any > cert exam 8 > times, and doesn't mind losing the money, then odds are they're > financially well-off enough that they can just retire now and get it > over with. > > Now that the written costs $300 US, taking the written 8 times would > cost $2400, and taking the lab eight times would cost over 9 grand. > That's a lot of beer money to go donating to Cisco... > > Hal Logan > Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty > Computing and Engineering Technology > Manatee Community College > > > -Original Message- > > From: Bullock, Jason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 11:48 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: Passed CCIE Written, life is good [7:26584] > > > > > > True, the written exam is tough, but really all about > > understanding rif and > > dlsw technologies. From there it comes down to memorizing > > the questions and > > taking the test a few times. I know guys that took that > > thing over 8 times > > in a row, just to pass it. I just got lucky and happened to > > pass it on the > > first time. Been a few months, and still have not scheduled > > the daunting > > lab though. > > > > jason > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Logan, Harold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 11:23 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: Passed CCIE Written, life is good [7:26584] > > > > > > I would rate the IE written as much more difficult than the > > CCNP Exams, > > and slightly more difficult than the CID exam. > > > > Hal Logan > > Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty > > Computing and Engineering Technology > > Manatee Community College > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Henk Wolf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2001 8:50 AM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: RE: Passed CCIE Written, life is good [7:26584] > > > > > > > > > Tnx for the feedback. > > > Did you do CCNP / CCDP as well? > > > If so how do these exams compare to the Written CCIE? Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=26932&t=26584 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: All you veterans... [7:26301]
According to my sources, veterans can now be reimbursed for their cisco exams with their MGIB money. I'm sending off the application for reimbursement today, and I'll post again to the list when (if) it goes through. What has me really kicking myself, I took four exams in march, and I can only find two of the score reports (y'know, the ones that say "DO NOT LOSE THIS REPORT") Supposedly, we should be able to get reimbursed for anything we've taken since March 1, 2001. Assuming this actually works, then I guess all those nights in the cold, in the rain, in the snow, etc. may have actually been worth it =) Hal Logan Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty Computing and Engineering Technology Manatee Community College > -Original Message- > From: Mcfadden, Chuck [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 6:52 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: All you veterans... [7:26301] > > > Great idea, I'll sign the petition. > ccie1ab > > -Original Message- > From: Estes, Timothy R. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 3:09 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: All you veterans... [7:26301] > > > I contacted Cisco, the Veterans Administration and the > California Department > of Veterans Affairs about this subject in July. Unfortunately > I haven't hear > anything in a while. > > The VA advised me that for veterans to be reimbursed for the > Cisco Career > Certification program, the program would have to be > "accredited" by the > state Department of Veterans Affairs in the state where > Cisco's headquarters > resides. > > I contacted the California Department of Veterans affairs and > found them to > be very cooperative. They wished to be put in contact with the correct > people at Cisco, so I gave them all of the contact info I > could from my > perspective. > > After a couple of weeks, I received the following email from Cisco > ([EMAIL PROTECTED])... > > >Dear Timothy, > > > >Thank you for your feedback. > > > >Due to requests from our dedicated customers, such as > yourself, Cisco has > >applied to have the Cisco Career Certification exams > approved under the VA > >Reimbursement Program. Once the details are finalized we > will post the > >information to our website. > > > >We thank you for your continued support of the Cisco Career > Certifications > >program. > > > >Cisco Career Certifications > > I have no idea what the status of Cisco's application is. I > hope them get it > approved soon, I have the 4 CCNP test to go! > > Maybe as a group we could use our collective resources to > expedite this > application? > > > Timothy Estes CCNA, CCDA > Sr. Network Systems Analyst > Intermedia Communications (WorldCom) > Tampa FL > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > (formerly RM3 USN) > > -Original Message- > From: Sal DiStefano [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 9:04 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: All you veterans... [7:26301] > > > Funny the Golf Course Superintendents Association of America > is on the list > but not Cisco. > > I called and they said to send it in and they may pay for it anyway. > > Sal > - Original Message - > From: "Jeff D" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 5:32 PM > Subject: All you veterans... [7:26301] > > > > Check it out for reimbursement: > > > > https://www.gibill.va.gov/Education/LCVets.htm Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=27011&t=26301 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: OSPF Unequal load balancing? [7:27311]
I just took a quick look at RFC's 1583 and 1247. OSPFv2 does not support unequal-cost load balancing. > -Original Message- > From: Cisco Breaker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 10:08 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: OSPF Unequal load balancing? [7:27311] > > > As I said before I implemented equal load balancing on > Motorola and Cisco > what I want to know is, Is it possible to configure OSPF unequal load > balancing ? You are saying that OSPF unequal load balancing > can not be done > on cisco I know that. The reason why I asked the question is > cause I know > that cisco can not do but is it the OSPF behaviour not to > implement unequal > load balancing or is it belong to Cisco's OSPF implementation? > My guess is OSPF. > > Best regards, > > > ""Ralph Fudamak"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > I don't know how Motorola implements OSPF, but with Cisco's > > implementation you can not do unequal cost load balancing > with OSPF. This > > is not to say that you can't manually change the metrics on > the links to > > appear to be equal cost. Keep in mind that this load > balancing is *equal* > > then. Your slow link will get as much traffic as your fast > one, which > could > > cause a bottleneck. See if there is some command to set a > default cost on > > the link, then set them both the same. > > > > Hope this helps > > > > ""Cisco Breaker"" wrote in message > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > I implemented OSPF load balancing but never done unequal > load balancing. > > My > > > customer wants Unequal loadbalancing on Motorola routers. > As I know > > Unequal > > > load balancing cant be implemented on Cisco without > policy-map? Any > > > suggestions or any info? > > > > > > Best regards, Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=27329&t=27311 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: OSPF Unequal load balancing? [7:27311]
This is kind of an off-the-wall question, is there a non-proprietary IGP that supports unequal-cost load balancing? Granted, you could tune the OSPF metrics so that two paths would appear equal (as others have pointed out) or you could use RIP, assuming that the hop count to reach the destination on both links is the same. In either case you still have equal cost load balancing on two unequal links, which will result in wasted bandwidth at best and a bottleneck at worst. It seems to me that if this link is important enough that you need traffic going over both connections, then it's important enough for Ciscobreaker's organization to either purchase a second Cisco router to run EIGRP and redistribute if necessary, or it needs to upgrade or downgrade one of the WAN links to make them equal. Hal Logan Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty Computing and Engineering Technology Manatee Community College > -Original Message- > From: Kane, Christopher A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 11:29 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: FW: OSPF Unequal load balancing? [7:27311] > > > I've scanned through John T. Moy's book but haven't found any > reference to > unequal load balancing. He only mentions equal-cost load > balancing. I'll > scan the RFC next. > > But, having thought about this for a minute. Wouldn't unequal > load balancing > break the idea behind OSPF? Isn't Dijkstra's Shortest Path > First algorithm > intended to find just that, the shortest path? I would think > that asking for > unequal load balancing would be in direct conflict behind the > algorithm that > is utilized for OSPF. > > Just some thoughts. > Chris > > -Original Message- > From: Kane, Christopher A. > Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 11:12 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: OSPF Unequal load balancing? [7:27311] > > > You can read RFC 2328 or John T Moy's OSPF Anatomy of a > Routing Protocol to > find that answer. I'll dig through them and see if I can find > you an answer > if no one else comes up with one sooner. > > HTH, > Chris > > -Original Message- > From: Cisco Breaker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 10:08 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: OSPF Unequal load balancing? [7:27311] > > > As I said before I implemented equal load balancing on > Motorola and Cisco > what I want to know is, Is it possible to configure OSPF unequal load > balancing ? You are saying that OSPF unequal load balancing > can not be done > on cisco I know that. The reason why I asked the question is > cause I know > that cisco can not do but is it the OSPF behaviour not to > implement unequal > load balancing or is it belong to Cisco's OSPF implementation? > My guess is OSPF. > > Best regards, > > > ""Ralph Fudamak"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > I don't know how Motorola implements OSPF, but with Cisco's > > implementation you can not do unequal cost load balancing > with OSPF. This > > is not to say that you can't manually change the metrics on > the links to > > appear to be equal cost. Keep in mind that this load > balancing is *equal* > > then. Your slow link will get as much traffic as your fast > one, which > could > > cause a bottleneck. See if there is some command to set a > default cost on > > the link, then set them both the same. > > > > Hope this helps > > > > ""Cisco Breaker"" wrote in message > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > I implemented OSPF load balancing but never done unequal > load balancing. > > My > > > customer wants Unequal loadbalancing on Motorola routers. > As I know > > Unequal > > > load balancing cant be implemented on Cisco without > policy-map? Any > > > suggestions or any info? > > > > > > Best regards, Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=27344&t=27311 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: multiple DHCP scopes in a vlan with primary an [7:27264]
For those of you that have implemented VLANs with DHCP, do you use one DHCP server per VLAN, or is there a way to bind a specific DHCP scope to each VLAN? Thanks, Hal > -Original Message- > From: Syed Raza [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 11:59 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: multiple DHCP scopes in a vlan with primary an [7:27264] > > > It is not recommended to have multiple subnet in one VLAN. > Basically you are > killing the whole concept of isolating the broadcast domain. > But you can not > argue that it does'nt work. Your DHCP server can assign any > ip from its > scopes. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=27346&t=27264 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: multiple DHCP scopes in a vlan with primary an [7:27264]
That's kind of why I was asking... I understand the significance of the helper addy. From there, DHCP requests get sent to a single DHCP server, that presumably has multiple scopes configured, one scope per subnet/VLAN. What do you do on the DHCP server to make it so that, when a host a VLAN requests an address, the DHCP server answers with an address from the appropriate scope? Thanks, Hal > -Original Message- > From: Gaz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 2:16 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: multiple DHCP scopes in a vlan with primary an [7:27264] > > > The original question, sorry can't remember who by, was whether this > configuration could be used for a VLAN which had Primary and > Secondary IP > addresses. The IP helper address only specifies the DHCP server. > > I'm fairly sure this could not work effectively, although > DHCP clients would > be issued with addresses. > My thought was that the IP addresses issued would always be > in the subnet of > the primary address. > > Anybody confirm or deny?? > > Cheers, > > Gaz > > ""Lange, Eric"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > The ip helper-address command is your buddy. The router > can convert a UDP > > broadcast packet into a unicast and route the packet to the > appropriate > > network that the DHCP server resides on. > > > > -Eric > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Logan, Harold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 11:41 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: multiple DHCP scopes in a vlan with primary an > [7:27264] > > > > > > For those of you that have implemented VLANs with DHCP, do > you use one > > DHCP server per VLAN, or is there a way to bind a specific > DHCP scope to > > each VLAN? > > > > Thanks, > > Hal > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Syed Raza [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 11:59 AM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Re: multiple DHCP scopes in a vlan with primary > an [7:27264] > > > > > > > > > It is not recommended to have multiple subnet in one VLAN. > > > Basically you are > > > killing the whole concept of isolating the broadcast domain. > > > But you can not > > > argue that it does'nt work. Your DHCP server can assign any > > > ip from its > > > scopes. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=27364&t=27264 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: DHCP Question (Think I have an answer) [7:27460]
Thank you everyone for your answers. At first I was wondering if some
special config had to be done on the DHCP server itself, but that isn't
the case. Gaz, you're saying that DHCP takes the source of the request
into account when it dishes out addresses, and it looks like you're
right. The DHCP server will respond to a DHCPDISCOVER request from a
bootp relay agent (ie a router with an ip helper address set) with an
address that's on the same subnet as the agent.
This is from RFC 2131, it's a listing of the order of preference when a
DHCP server assigns an address. Note: "giaddr" is the address of the
bootp relay agent. Check out the 4th bullet:
When a server receives a DHCPDISCOVER message from a client, the
server chooses a network address for the requesting client. If no
address is available, the server may choose to report the problem to
the system administrator. If an address is available, the new address
SHOULD be chosen as follows:
o The client's current address as recorded in the client's current
binding, ELSE
o The client's previous address as recorded in the client's (now
expired or released) binding, if that address is in the server's
pool of available addresses and not already allocated, ELSE
o The address requested in the 'Requested IP Address' option, if
that
address is valid and not already allocated, ELSE
o A new address allocated from the server's pool of available
addresses; the address is selected based on the subnet from
which
the message was received (if 'giaddr' is 0) or on the address of
the relay agent that forwarded the message ('giaddr' when not
0).
Again, thanks for all the help.
Hal Logan
Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty
Computing and Engineering Technology
Manatee Community College
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On
> Behalf Of
> Gaz
> Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 5:34 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: DHCP Question [7:27380]
>
>
> Dave said:
>
> "The only reason for this I can fathom is because the DHCP
> request is no
> longer a broadcast it now has the source address of the
> router interface
> that the helper address is setup on and it seems DHCP will take this
> into account when dishing out addresses."
>
> That's exactly the assumption I've always made, but I'm not totally
> convinced. I'd like to sniff the packet and actually see whether it's
> dependant upon the source address or something contained within the
> packet. As per usual IF I get chance I'll put a sniffer on.
>
> Anybody know for sure?
>
> Gaz
>
> wrote in message
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > As mentioned in an earier reply..you must have your DHCP Scopes
> > correctly set up
> >
> > I've found that with NT4/W2k DHCP servers
> > that, If for example your DHCP server is set up to dish out
> addresses
> > in
> the
> > range of 192.168.1.1 to 100 mask 255.255.255.0 and it receives a
> > request
> for
> > an address directed from the helper routers interface which has an
> > address of 10.1.1.1 (which means your DHCP clients will be
> on the same
>
> > network) it will ignore that request. The only reason for
> this I can
> > fathom is because the DHCP request is no longer a broadcast
> it now has
>
> > the source address of the router interface that the helper
> address is
> > setup on and it seems DHCP will take this into account when dishing
> > out addresses.
> >
> > I've found that if a scope in the 10.1.1.0 range is setup on the
> > server my DHCP clients will recieve an IP address in the
> correct 10.
> > range with no problem.
> >
> > I have two scopes on my DHCP server
> > 172.16.60.1 - 172.16.61.254 Subnet 255.255.254.0 and 10.222.36.1
> > -10.222.37.254 Subnet 255.255.254.0
> >
> > my router interface configured to forward DHCP reqests is set up as
> follows
> > ..
> > ip address 10.222.36.2 255.255.254.0
> > ip helper-address 155.131.60.40 (MY DHCP SERVER address )
> > my DHCP clients never get an address from the wrong range
> if i disable
>
> > the 10.222.36.0 range my dhcp clients behind the router
> don't get an
> > address at all ...
> >
> > Hope this make sense and helps and if i'm talking pants
> please someone
>
> > put me straight ...
> >
> > Regards Dave
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=27460&t=27460
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: DHCP Question [7:27380]
The ip helper-address is the right direction. Are there any filters on the WAN side, either on your router or at the ISP? You need UDP port 67 enabled for your setup to work. As for the ip forward-protocol command, when you enable the ip helper-address, several protocols get forwarded, not just dhcp. That can result in unnecessary traffic going across your WAN cannection, so you can disable other types of traffic using these commands: no ip forward-protocol udp 37 no ip forward-protocol udp 49 no ip forward-protocol udp 53 no ip forward-protocol udp 69 no ip forward-protocol udp 137 no ip forward-protocol udp 138 But it sounds like your biggest obstacle is something blocking your DHCP traffic on the WAN side. Is this going through a cable provider like @home or roadrunner? I've had headaches in the past as a result of them blocking various types of UDP traffic. Hal Logan Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty Computing and Engineering Technology Manatee Community College > -Original Message- > From: Rashid Lohiya [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 5:14 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: DHCP Question [7:27380] > > > Hey All, > > I was trying to help a freind get his DHCP working, but got stuck. > > He has a DHCP server set up across the WAN. > > I know that routers drop broadcasts, so I thought I would be > able to turn > the DHCP/UDP broadcasts into unicasts by providing an > ip-helper address, on > the local ethernet pointing to the remote DHCP server, so I > did, but this > did not work. > > Secondly I tried putting on the ip dhcp-server a.b.c.d > command, and thought > maybe this would point incoming traffic towards the DHCP > server, but again > this did not work. > > I even tried doing the old ip forward-protocol udp statement. > > Then when I did a show run, I saw a no ip directed-broadcast > statement, on > the ethernet so I enabled that, but still no difference. > > Pls. Can someone give me a brief nudge in the direction I > should be going > next, or point out where I am going wrong. > > The DHCP server is working OK! I can ping it from the routers > and can get > addresses from the local network. > > The PC's are fine, waiting for an IP Address. > > My brain is tired and any hints would be appreciated. > > Regards, > > Rashid Lohiya > [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=27462&t=27380 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Absolute Must-See Cisco-related website [7:27490]
Yah that site's great'n all, but here are some that REALLY have all the answers: http://3330661145 http://68265990 http://2355282214 Hal -Original Message- > From: TALBOT, WILLIAM P (SWBT) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 2:06 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Absolute Must-See Cisco-related website [7:27490] > > > I have heard of that site (from somewhere...) but I don't > have the time > to do all that typing into the web browser and then all that > typing into > the search windows and sifting through the results and then > reading and > trying to understand what the pages say...it's all just too > time consuming! > I would much rather have someone just hold my hand and > explain it all to > me without having to do all of that other stuff on my > own...and I do really > appreciate how much effort I avoid by doing it that way. > > Thanks, > > Pat ;-) > > -Original Message- > From: John Neiberger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 11:42 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Absolute Must-See Cisco-related website [7:27490] > > > Check this out. I found it recently and I have never run > across a more > useful site with more information regarding networking technologies, > Cisco-related products and capabilities, configuration > guides, you name > it! The URL is: > > www.cisco.com > > > Regards, > John (who apparently needs some more coffee this morning ) Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=27502&t=27490 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Send BREAK to console thru term server [7:27572]
It can be done, but your telnet program has to support the break sequence. The telnet program that ships with win98 won't do it, but if you use hyperterm as your telnet client, that does work, depending on the OS. The version of hyperterm that ships with win98 supports the break sequence, but the one that ships with Windows NT doesn't. Those are the only ones I've messed with to see if the password recovery works or not. Here's my setup: Using hyperterm, I telnet into a 2509 router, that has an octal cable plugging into several other routers' console ports. From there, if I or one of my students want to do the password recovery procedure just for practice, that's no problem. I console into the router from the 2509, and I enable, type reload, and as the router reboots, I hit Ctrl-break. No problem. Where you run into problems is if you actually need to do a password recovery because you don't know the enable password. Either you need to call someone on site and ask them to reboot the router, or there are products by APC (and others I'm sure) that will let you remotely power-cycle a router. hth, Hal Logan Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty Computing and Engineering Technology Manatee Community College > -Original Message- > From: Sean Wu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 4:01 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Send BREAK to console thru term server [7:27572] > > > How can we send a "BREAK" signal via telnet session? > > I access some device via terminal server, the only thing I am > wondering is > how to send a BREAK so that I can do password recovery. > > thanks. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=27669&t=27572 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: BGP question [7:27879]
That's normal. BGP doesn't actually route data like an IGP does, it only handles routing information. You don't have to use RIP, you can use an IGP or (preferably) static routes. Hal Logan Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty Computing and Engineering Technology Manatee Community College > -Original Message- > From: Stephen C [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, November 30, 2001 3:37 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: BGP question [7:27879] > > > When configuring BGP on a "singlehome" net, everything I read > says the basic > config commands are ... for S 0\0 to S 0\0 (200.200.1.1 to > 200.200.1.2) > wire 200.200.1.0 > Router-A(config)#router bgp [as#] > Router-A(config-router)#network [subnet#] > Router-A(config-router)#neighbor [subnet#] remote-as [as#] > now filling in the blanks > Router-A(config)#router bgp [200] > Router-A(config-router)#network [200.200.1.0] > Router-A(config-router)#neighbor [200.200.1.1] remote-as [100] > unless I configure RIP on the same wire I get nothing. No > mention of RIP in > any > of the books I reference. I config RIP and get a "from show > ip route" this > C200.200.1.0/24 is directly connected, Serial1 > R200.200.100.0/24 [120/1] via 200.200.1.1, 00:00:14, Serial1 > [120/1] via 200.200.2.1, 00:00:14, Serial0 > C200.200.2.0/24 is directly connected, Serial0 > C192.168.1.0/24 is directly connected, Ethernet0 > O192.168.2.0/24 [110/74] via 192.168.1.2, 01:54:20, > Ethernet0 > O E2 192.168.3.0/24 [110/20] via 192.168.1.2, 01:54:20, > Ethernet0 > Not showing bgp on the connections > > the Show ip bgp yields . > Router-A#show ip bgp > BGP table version is 3, local router ID is 200.200.2.2 > Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * > valid, > best, i - > internal > Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete > > Network Next HopMetric LocPrf > Weight Path > * 200.200.1.0 200.200.2.1 0 >0 100 i > * 200.200.1.1 0 >0 100 i > > *> 0.0.0.0 0 > 32768 i Where > did I pick up the Static/Default paths from > > * 200.200.2.0 200.200.2.1 0 >0 100 i > * 200.200.1.1 0 >0 100 i > *> 0.0.0.0 0 > 32768 i Where > did I pick up the Static/Default paths from Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=27885&t=27879 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Finally CCDP too!! [7:28040]
Granted, I have more support experience than I do design experience, but I found the CID exam to be more of a bear than the CCIE Written. Good luck, Hal Logan CCAI, CCDP, CCNP+Voice Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty Computing and Engineering Technology Manatee Community College > -Original Message- > From: Darren Crawford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 11:19 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Finally CCDP too!! [7:28040] > > > I wanted to thank everyone who helped me focus and pass the CID exam. > Specifically, Jim Walker and Scott Nawalaniec! Thanks for your > encouragement and direction in the areas to zero in on. > > This test is a bruiser! But with perseverance you can get by it too! > > Darren > > > x$:0`0:$xx$:0`0:$xx$:0`0:$xx$:0`0:$x$:0`0:$xx$ > :0`0:$xx > > Lucent Technologies > NetworkCare Professional Services > http//www.lucent.com/netcare/ > Darren S. Crawford - CCNP, CCDP, CCIE TBA > > Northwest Region - Sacramento Office > Voicemail (916) 859-5200 x310 > Pager (800) 467-1467 > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > x$:0`0:$xx$:0`0:$xx$:0`0:$xx$:0`0:$x$:0`0:$xx$ > :0`0:$xx > > "You always have time for things you put first" - Tucker Resources Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=28065&t=28040 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: 640-503 version 1.0 and 2.0 [7:28268]
If the books say 640-503 (not 640-403) then you're looking at material for the new test. What is now the Routing exam, 640-503, used to be the ACRC, 640-403. Use the 503 books you have and spend some time working with a rack of routers and you should be in good shape. Hal Logan Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty Computing and Engineering Technology Manatee Community College > -Original Message- > From: johan ericsson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 4:19 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: 640-503 version 1.0 and 2.0 [7:28268] > > > Hi! > > Took the step recently to try and archieve the ccnp, found a > couple of books > at my work that was for 640-503. > > I have read in a couple of places that bcsn just like the > ccna has been > upgraded to a new version (2.0). > > Anyone know if there has been any major changes in the topics? > > best regards Johan Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=28279&t=28268 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Boson Practice Tests -- Cheating?? [7:28318]
I downloaded one of the Boson tests the day I took the written. The test I downloaded was hardly my primary means of studying, it was more of a last-minute evaluation of how ready I was. Yes, there are some questions on the exam that were similar to some of the boson questions. The questions that "looked awful familiar" were very general in nature; none of the more complex questions I got rang a bell... and I don't really see how you could write test-prep software and not have similarities on the general questions. I mean, there are so many ways to word a simple question while keeping it straightforward. The existence of the boson tests and others like them may devalue the CCNA and CCNP certs, but it doesn't have an impact on the IE, in my opinion. After all, making it easier for someone to pass the CCIE Written isn't exactly doing them a favor. And if test-prep software didn't exist, anyone who can afford it could always keep taking the tests until they pass. I ran into somebody a while back who passed the MS TCP/IP exam on his 7th try. The only difference is, someone gives $40 to boson instead of another $125 or $300 to Cisco and Prometric. I honestly don't care if there are more CCNA's or NP's out there. I know that I've worked to get the certs I have, and I'll continue to work for the ones I don't have yet. Hal Logan Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty Computing and Engineering Technology Manatee Community College > -Original Message- > From: Tim Toole [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 4:08 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Boson Practice Tests -- Cheating?? [7:28318] > > > Hey Gang, > Why do people use the Boson practice tests when they > know that the questions are almost exactly like the > real Cisco test? Do people think that it is just a > coincidence that the questions are almost the exact > same as the real Cisco test? It's almost like > cheating. This would to me seem to devalue the Cisco > certifications if I could practically buy the same > test from Boson. > > Help me out here. I'm I off base on this one? > > TimT > > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Send your FREE holiday greetings online! > http://greetings.yahoo.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=28328&t=28318 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: DHCP [7:28392]
When any DHCP server receives a request, it hands out an address on the same subnet as the requesting host, or the same subnet as the bootp relay agent, if there is one. hth, Hal > -Original Message- > From: Nat Heidler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 8:16 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: DHCP [7:28392] > > > Sure, I could tell you where on CCO to find out about DHCP, > but it's much > more fun for you to read about it at www.routergod.com. By > the way, one > thing I never did find documentation on is DHCP pools. If you > have multiple > interfaces and want to do multiple pools, how do the > interfaces know which > pool goes where? They just magically do. I have a 3662 with 7 > interfaces, > each having it's own network and DCHP pool. Works like a champ. > > Nat > Somewhere in Kansas, USA Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=28398&t=28392 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: RIP routing (2 router lab) newbie [7:28327]
It looks like Anil wants to get RIP to advertise the 193.9.200.0 network. A secondary address may work on one of the interfaces, but it would need to be on a different subnet. Notice from the config, he gave the secondary address the same IP as the primary addy. No matter what he does with the 193.9.200.0 network, those two routers will always show it as being "Directly Connected" instead of learned through RIP; DC routes have an administrative distance of 0, whereas RIP has an AD of 120. In the routing table, the router is only going o show the route with the best (lowest) distance. He could add a loopback on a different subnet on one of the routers, then add network statements for that subnet, and then he would see that network learned via RIP on the opposite router. Likewise Anil, if you had a 3rd router connecting to one of your two routers by the BRI port, that 3rd router would learn of the 193.9.200.0 network through RIP. (Granted, RIP wouldn't be your ideal routing protocol for an ISDN line, but that's going a little bit deeper than you need to for now) Try these configs, then look at your routing tables: > hostname rustya > ! > enable secret 5 $1$Ws8V$mRIwI97bc/Iv7PAEKFBVo1 > ! > interface Loopback0 > ip address 200.10.10.1 255.255.255.0 > ! > interface Ethernet0 > ip address 192.9.200.1 255.255.255.0 > ! > interface BRI0 > no ip address > shutdown > ! > router rip > network 193.9.200.0 > network 200.10.10.0 > ! > no ip classless > ! > line con 0 > line vty 0 4 > password cisco > login > ! > end > hostname rustyb > ! > enable secret 5 $1$JycL$W4sNa8kuL2.tppX2IYQJU/ > ! > interface Loopback0 > ip address 201.10.10.1 255.255.255.0 > ! > interface Ethernet0 > ip address 192.9.200.2 255.255.255.0 > ! > interface BRI0 > no ip address > shutdown > ! > router rip > network 196.9.200.0 > network 201.10.10.0 > ! > no ip classless > ! > line con 0 > line vty 0 4 > password cisco > login > ! > end hth, Hal > -Original Message- > From: Kane, Christopher A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 9:26 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: RIP routing (2 router lab) newbie [7:28327] > > > I'm not sure if RIP is the same as OSPF, but if so, you must have OSPF > running on the interface via the Primary address in order to have the > Secondary address also participate in OSPF. Did you try > adding your Primary > address (network statement) to RIP also? > > Chris > > > > -Original Message- > From: Chuck Larrieu > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 12/6/01 5:45 PM > Subject: RE: RIP routing (2 router lab) newbie [7:28327] > > try using loopbacks instead of secondaries. Are your > secondary addresses > part of the RIP process via network statements? same subnet > boundary as > the > primary address? > > Chuck > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > anil > Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 2:03 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RIP routing (2 router lab) newbie [7:28327] > > > 2 C1603's connected to a hub. > It should be simple but I cannot see why RIP does not > update the routing tables (in either direction). > I added secondary addresses to both routers e0, and want RIP to send > these > routes. > > Any comments/suggestions welcome. > Many thanks > -Anil > > > - > rustya#sh ip route > > Gateway of last resort is not set > C193.9.200.0/24 is directly connected, Ethernet0 > C192.9.200.0/24 is directly connected, Ethernet0 > rustya# > -- > hostname rustya > ! > enable secret 5 $1$Ws8V$mRIwI97bc/Iv7PAEKFBVo1 > ! > ! > interface Ethernet0 > ip address 193.9.200.1 255.255.255.0 secondary > ip address 192.9.200.1 255.255.255.0 > ! > interface BRI0 > no ip address > shutdown > ! > router rip > network 193.9.200.0 > ! > no ip classless > ! > line con 0 > line vty 0 4 > password cisco > login > ! > end > > > > > rustyb#sh ip route > > Gateway of last resort is not set > > C192.9.200.0/24 is directly connected, Ethernet0 > C196.9.200.0/24 is directly connected, Ethernet0 > rustyb# > > hostname rustyb > ! > enable secret 5 $1$JycL$W4sNa8kuL2.tppX2IYQJU/ > ! > ! > interface Ethernet0 > ip address 196.9.200.1 255.255.255.0 secondary > ip address 192.9.200.2 255.255.255.0 > ! > interface BRI0 > no ip address > shutdown > ! > router rip > network 196.9.200.0 > ! > no ip classless > ! > line con 0 > line vty 0 4 > password cisco > login > ! > end Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=28399&t=28327 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: sbr [7:28336]
Funny that you mention that... I recently got ahold of a McGraw Hill book, "CCNP Guide to Advanced Cisco Routing" by Michael Grice. I found that his book goes well beyond the CCNP level, going more in-depth on BGP and a few other topics than many CCIE-level books do. I also have the CCIE Lab Practice Kit by MH, and I'm finding it to be useful as well. Hal > -Original Message- > From: Chuck Larrieu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 2:53 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: sbr [7:28336] > > > This seems as good a time as any to make this particular > comment. On the > subject of bridging, there is a pretty good book available > from McGraw Hill > Technical Expert Series - called "Configuring Cisco Routers > for Bridging, > DLSw+, and Desktop Protocols" by Tan Nam-Kee. the book > features lots of > configurations, and lots of show command outputs, so you can > read, configure > on your own routers or rental racks, and get something up and > working to the > point where you can learn first hand the shortcomings of the > book - i.e. it > is for beginners, and stops short of the kind of expertise > one might need > for production or advanced study preparation. I found while > prepping for my > recent Lab attempt that there came a point where I had to > make some leaps of > faith. But considering before I read the book I didn't know > jack about DLSw, > and after a day's study with Nam-Kee I actually knew jill > about it, that's > good. Especially after some frustrating efforts using CCO as > a learning > source. > > After a couple of years of this, I have pretty much come to > the conclusion > that the McGraw Hill series is at least as good an investment > as is Cisco > Press, and in many cases McG-H can be a better investment. > Cisco has taken > to packaging a lot of the material on CCO into books, and releasing it > sometimes even under the "CCIE" series. > > A couple of specific examples. Terry Slattery's book > "Advanced IP Routing in > Cisco Networks" compares favorably with Doyle, and in some > ways ( in terms > of practice labs and configuration examples ) is IMHO better. The > Held/Hundley "Cisco Access Lists Field Guide is superior to > anything Cisco > Press offers. Adam Quiggle's VPN book is a great place to > start, even if his > section on multipoint tunnels leaves one scratching various body parts > trying to figure out why his configurations don't work on > real routers ;-> > > I will say that the Cisco Press Parkhurst BGP book is first > rate. But then > unlike other Cisco Press books, Parkhurst actually goes in depth into > practical BGP configuration. I have one Cisco Press book > which purports to > be a CCIE prep book that has proven absolutely useless for > study. I have > another which I still can't decide if it has merit or not, > which probably > means it doesn't. > > In any case, in answer to the question about SRB, the Tan > Nam-Kee book is > worth taking a look at - particularly if you have access to > some routers so > your can tweak the configs. > > Chuck > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > John Neiberger > Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 3:32 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: sbr [7:28336] > > > It's actually called Source Route Bridging, and you can find lots of > info at www.cisco.com. > > HTH, > John > > >>> "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" 12/6/01 > 4:12:30 PM >>> > Can someone please tell me where I can find some good infomation on > Source > Bridge routing. > > James > ' Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=28401&t=28336 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Need BCRAN latest Dumps! [7:28236]
For some reason that hasn't happened to me yet. I must be teaching the wrong classes ;) > -Original Message- > From: anil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 8:34 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Need BCRAN latest Dumps! [7:28236] > > > There was a girl who walked into the > professor's office 1 day before the finals. > "Professor, I'll do anything, just ANYthing you want if I > could just pass > that exam of yours tomorrow" she said in her sweetest voice. > "Anything?" asked the professor.. > "Sure, I'll do JUST ANY thing, " she said putting his hand on > her thigh. > > "Well that's wonderful" he replied... > "You have a lot of work to catch up on and only 24 hours left > to do it, why > don't you run to the library before it closes" > > -Anil > > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > Mcfadden, Chuck > Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 10:52 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Need BCRAN latest Dumps! [7:28236] > > > We not prone to liking dumps around here. You see, there's this thing > called a confidentiality agreement. You know, that pesky > thing that keeps > us who have work our tails off to earn a certification or two > by reading > books, doing installations, asking questions, and buying labs > for our homes. > You know, those of us who care more about the technology than > the piece of > paper on the wall. > > My feeling is, "to each his own." If you want to cheat to gain your > certification, fine. However, don't fault me when our > certification levels > are equal and we are vying for the same customer or job. I > can assure you, > it may take me longer to get my certifications than you, but > when we come > face to face with the same customer or job...stand aside, > it's all mine. So > you go ahead and cheat then wonder why you can't rate amongst > your peers. > > I seem to remember Microsoft had this problem with the MCSE NT4.0 > certification. After a while everyone had their MCSE. Maybe > 15% of the > MCSE were worth a salt because everyone cheated. Let's not > let this guy > decline our value in the market. I may seem a bit extreme, > but we need to > ban all of these cheater sites. They destroy everything we > value with the > certification. Even if you only use them to brush up before > the test. If > you can't pass the test do more, do cheat!! > ccie1ab > > -Original Message- > From: SA J [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 8:08 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Need BCRAN latest Dumps! [7:28236] > > > Hi All, > This is my first email on groupstudy mailing list! i > will be giving BCRAN this weekend! i have read the > book of BCRAN - Cisco Press! also did some practice of > BOSON! now i need some latest Dumps of BCRAN, if > available anywhere pls. do let me know! > B'Rgds, > SAJ > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Send your FREE holiday greetings online! > http://greetings.yahoo.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=28402&t=28236 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: OT - How to get MAC address of remote device when I have [7:28415]
You'll need access to the router that's local to the remote host. View that router's ARP cache (show ip arp, etc.) and you should be able to find it. hth, Hal Logan Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty Computing and Engineering Technology Manatee Community College > -Original Message- > From: Provost, Robert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 10:46 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: OT - How to get MAC address of remote device when I > have the IP > [7:28408] > > > Sorry for the off topic post. > > Does anyone know how I can determine the MAC address of a > remote device when > I do have the IP? I ping it but my arp cache only shows the local > addresses. > > Any help would be appreciated. > > Thanks. > > Robert Provost > Data Communications Engineer > Genesis Health Ventures > Phone: 610-925-1147 Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=28415&t=28415 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Cisco WAN Certifications [7:28615]
It's funny, the only person I know who got the CCNA WAN Switching was a CCNP who also wanted the letters "CCNA" on his resume in case he ran into a headhunter who knew what a CCNA was, but had never heard of a CCNP. I've heard of stranger things, but not many... > -Original Message- > From: Paul Jin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2001 8:53 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Cisco WAN Certifications [7:28615] > > > Yup, it is retiring. First, they retired the WAN CCIE and now, they > have finished off the rest. > > Not sure how valuable this cert really is now days. > > As far as replacement, not really sure if they will really > come out with > anything to replace it. > > The new C/S CCIE's written portion can be taken with the WAN switching > option from what I hear. I think 50% of the test is > general and is the same and the last 50% can be chosen among many > different options and WAN switching is supposed to be one of them. > > Still, in the lab, no WAN switching equipment. just routers and > lan switches. > > Paul Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=28696&t=28615 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: RIP routing (2 router lab) newbie [7:28327]
Interesting... thanks for the explanation Chuck. Hal > -Original Message- > From: Chuck Larrieu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 12:32 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: RIP routing (2 router lab) newbie [7:28327] > > > I spent a bit more time looking into this one than it may be > worth. But my > look did reinforce some points made in this thread and in > another thread > started by John Neiberger and researched so ably by Nigel > Taylor - that is, > the nature and behaviour of secondary addresses. > > Sorry I am unable to document everything I did here. It would take me > writing a Jeff Doyle type chapter on RIP to get it all out > and explained, > with screen shots etc. > > To put things in terms of how I observed them: > > In the case of RIP, by default, advertisements are sent out > an interface > using the primary address of that interface as the source address. > > if another router on the segment is using and address that is > not on the > same subnet as the primary, that router will see messages like this: > > 01:46:25: RIP: ignored v1 update from bad source 172.29.101.1 > on TokenRing0 > 01:46:30: RIP: ignored v1 update from bad source 172.29.101.2 > on TokenRing0 > 01:46:35: RIP: sending v1 update to 255.255.255.255 via TokenRing0 > (172.29.103.7) > > 103.1 was secondary address on my R1, 103.7 the address of my > R3 You can see > the error referring to 101.1 and 102.1 ( the address of > another router on > the segment ) > > I threw in a no ip split-horizon command on the interface of > my R1, and lo > and behold, it started sourcing rip packets from 101.1, 102.1 > and 103.1 and > all my RIP routes propagated > > from CCO: > > Note If any router on a network segment uses a secondary > address, all > other routers on that same segment must also use a secondary > address from > the same network or subnet. > > > some of us already commented about issues with secondary > routes among the > various routing protocols. the point being that using > secondary addresses > can be tricky, and is probably not a good idea for newbies > just trying to > learn the basics. if you want to see how things work, use > loopbacks. with > secondary addresses, it is to easy to end up fighting with > some complex > issues beyond a beginner's understanding. in fact, there are > some advanced > students who find this topic complex and mysterious. > > best wishes. > > Chuck > > BTW, one of the implications of this study was a walk down > memory lance. A > guy named Bob Vance who used to hang here a lot and who was > the progenitor > of a number of interesting discussions once postulated that > all stations on > a segment will see the all F's broadcast, even if their layer three > addresses are different ( i.e. seconday's ) the output above > is something of > a proof of that supposition. The router saw the RIP packets with the > destination address of 255.255.255.255 ( MAC .. > ), processed the > packet, saw the source address as being on a different subnet > ( even though > on the same segment ) and rejected the packet. Interesting. > Especially in > that all subnets were part of the same Class B network. > > > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > Logan, Harold > Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 6:21 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: RIP routing (2 router lab) newbie [7:28327] > > > It looks like Anil wants to get RIP to advertise the 193.9.200.0 > network. A secondary address may work on one of the interfaces, but it > would need to be on a different subnet. Notice from the > config, he gave > the secondary address the same IP as the primary addy. No > matter what he > does with the 193.9.200.0 network, those two routers will > always show it > as being "Directly Connected" instead of learned through RIP; > DC routes > have an administrative distance of 0, whereas RIP has an AD of 120. In > the routing table, the router is only going o show the route with the > best (lowest) distance. He could add a loopback on a > different subnet on > one of the routers, then add network statements for that subnet, and > then he would see that network learned via RIP on the opposite router. > Likewise Anil, if you had a 3rd router connecting to one of your two > routers by the BRI port, that 3rd router would learn of the > 193.9.200.0 > network through RIP. (Granted, RIP wouldn't be your ideal routing > protocol for an ISDN line, but that's goin
RE: Cisco WAN Certifications [7:28615]
What Cisco says in their certification policies, if I remember correctly, is that you're only supposed to list the highest certification you've earned in a given track, ie I shouldn't list both CCNA and CCNP on my resume, nor should I list both CCDA and CCDP. But if someone does a text search on the bodies of a batch of resumes, a search for CCNA wouldn't dig up my resume unless I list both CCNA and CCNP. Add to that, if I list both and someone runs a search on ccna AND ccnp, then my resume should theoretically come up higher on the list. Is it cheesy? Well yes, but I've met HR people who will tell you with a straight face they stop reading resumes after 100. There was also a point when very few recruiters even knew what a CCNP was; they just thought there was a CCNA and a CCIE, and a CCIE was somehow better than a CCNA. Yes, the whole process is lame. I compare it to wrestling with a pug in the mud (remember, the pig enjoys it!) Hal Logan CCAI, CCDP, CCNP+Voice Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty Computing and Engineering Technology Manatee Community College > -Original Message- > From: nrf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 1:47 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Cisco WAN Certifications [7:28615] > > > But wait a minute, now. Isn't the CCNA a pre-req for the > CCNP? Or did your > friend happen to get the CCNP back in the really old days > when I believe the > CCNA was not a CCNP prereq? > > But yeah - the WAN certs are/were pretty useless. I think the best > summation of them is this: > > http://groups.google.com/groups?q=group:alt.certification.cisc > o+CCNA+WAN+Ber > nie&hl=en&rnum=4&selm=D114BCE99217DBA5.C29F159A840CE0A3.4672B0 > C849D9CF41%40l > p.airnews.net > > ""Logan, Harold"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > It's funny, the only person I know who got the CCNA WAN > Switching was a > > CCNP who also wanted the letters "CCNA" on his resume in case he ran > > into a headhunter who knew what a CCNA was, but had never heard of a > > CCNP. > > > > I've heard of stranger things, but not many... > > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Paul Jin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2001 8:53 PM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: RE: Cisco WAN Certifications [7:28615] > > > > > > > > > Yup, it is retiring. First, they retired the WAN CCIE > and now, they > > > have finished off the rest. > > > > > > Not sure how valuable this cert really is now days. > > > > > > As far as replacement, not really sure if they will really > > > come out with > > > anything to replace it. > > > > > > The new C/S CCIE's written portion can be taken with the > WAN switching > > > option from what I hear. I think 50% of the test is > > > general and is the same and the last 50% can be chosen among many > > > different options and WAN switching is supposed to be one of them. > > > > > > Still, in the lab, no WAN switching equipment. just routers and > > > lan switches. > > > > > > Paul Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=28731&t=28615 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Access Lists [7:28927]
On what interface(s) is that ACL applied? The way you've written it, the ACL permits IP traffic with a source address of 165.5.x.x, and the second (unnecessary) line denies all other traffic. If that ACL is applied on the interfaces that your users dial into, then it won't accomplish much. If you're trying to filter based on destination IP address, then the first line should be written "access-list 110 permit ip any 165.5.0.0 0.0.0.255" hth, Hal > -Original Message- > From: J. Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 2:24 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Access Lists [7:28927] > > > We have a Cisco 5300 Dial-up. We want to allow everyone to get to our > network when they dial in. We do not want everyone to get on > the internet > when they dial-in. This is what my access list look like > > access-list 110 permit ip 165.5.0.0 0.0.255.255 any > access-list 110 deny ip any any > > Everyone can get to our network and get on the internet with > the above list. > Can you see anything wrong? > > Thanks. > > Jill Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=28949&t=28927 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Access Lists [7:28927]
On what interface(s) is that ACL applied? The way you've written it, the ACL permits IP traffic with a source address of 165.5.x.x, and the second (unnecessary) line denies all other traffic. If that ACL is applied on the interfaces that your users dial into, then it won't accomplish much. If you're trying to filter based on destination IP address, then the first line should be written "access-list 110 permit ip any 165.5.0.0 0.0.0.255" hth, Hal > -Original Message- > From: J. Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 2:24 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Access Lists [7:28927] > > > We have a Cisco 5300 Dial-up. We want to allow everyone to get to our > network when they dial in. We do not want everyone to get on > the internet > when they dial-in. This is what my access list look like > > access-list 110 permit ip 165.5.0.0 0.0.255.255 any > access-list 110 deny ip any any > > Everyone can get to our network and get on the internet with > the above list. > Can you see anything wrong? > > Thanks. > > Jill Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=28949&t=28927 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: GroupStudy we have a problem.... [7:28901]
You guys rock. I'd also gladly chip in to keep the list up and running. Cheers, Hal Logan Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty Computing and Engineering Technology Manatee Community College > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 1:33 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: GroupStudy we have a problem [7:28901] > > > Anytime, any place...Send us the info, This list is too > important. Ole, how > is the guitar playing these days > > Thanks, > > Duncan > > Duncan Wallace > Sr. Network Engineer > 800.COM Inc. > 1516 NW Thurman St > Portland, OR 97209-2517 > > Direct: 503.944.3671 > Cell: 503.969.8248 > Fax: 503.943.9371 > Web: http://800.com > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > -Original Message- > From: Ole Drews Jensen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 9:49 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: GroupStudy we have a problem [7:28901] > > Thanks Paul, > > Please provide me with your address, and I will send you a > contribution in > form of a check towards better equipment. Your list has > helped me to get > where I am, and I would like to thank you for that. > > Merry Christmas, > > Ole > > ~~~ > Ole Drews Jensen > Systems Network Manager > CCNP, MCSE, MCP+I > RWR Enterprises, Inc. > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ~~~ > http://www.RouterChief.com > ~~~ > NEED A JOB ??? > http://www.oledrews.com/job > ~~~ > > > -Original Message- > From: Paul Borghese [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 10:38 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: GroupStudy we have a problem [7:28901] > > > Hey gang, > > Servers database became corrupt thus preventing messages from > being sent > out. It has been fixed so if you do not see your posting, > please resend. I > have shipped more memory to InFlow. Lon has agreed to > install it for us. > This should help. So by the way, the server will be down > for a little > while tomorrow :-) > > The truth is we desperately need some better equipment. > Currently we are > using a server I built for $500 dollars two years ago. I > purchased a used > Dell Server but need to upgrade the RAID array and a few > other things before > putting it online. > > Take care, > > Paul Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=29008&t=28901 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Mask in L3 Packet [7:29182]
Right off the bat, you're talking about a disfunctional network. I'll get to that in a second. Your two hosts are never going to acknowledge each others' existence. In fact, if you look at the internal routing table of either host by doing a "route print" you'll see (among other things) this entry: Network Address Netmask Gateway Address 172.16.2.1 255.255.255.255 127.0.0.1 So if host A tries to ping host B, it's just going to ping itself (remember, 127.0.0.1 is a loopback). Granted, it may keep host A from feeling lonely (kinda like sending yourself flowers on Velentine's Day) but host A won't communicate with host B on its best day. Now ask yourslf this: when a host from a different network tries to send traffic to 172.16.2.1, will it go to host A or host B? Answer that question and come up with a solid justification for your answer, and much of your confusion will vanish in a poof of one's and zero's. hth, Hal Logan Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty Computing and Engineering Technology Manatee Community College > -Original Message- > From: Steven A. Ridder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 2:07 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Mask in L3 Packet [7:29182] > > > Say I have 2 networks: > > Network 1. 172.16.x.x/16 > and > Network 2. 172.16.2.x/24 > > We all agree that they are two different networks, right? > > Now if Host A on > Network 1 is 172.16.2.1/16 > > and > > Host B is on Network 2 is 172.16.2.1/24, > > How does the host know that the second host is on a different > network? Are > they differnt addresses because of the mask, or are they > considered the same > address regardless of mask, and therefore illegal? I > understand ANDing on > the local host. It's just if 2 hosts had the same numbers, > only marked > differently by the mask, are they the same or not? Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=29235&t=29182 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: cisco academy's routing skills final ,tough!!! [7:29212]
That's par for the course. When they first deployed the CCNA curriculum it was ugly, inaccurate, and ambiguous, and it read like stereo instructions... not to mention the first version of the textbooks for the class, which weren't even useful as doorstops (I checked; they were too thin to wedge under the door, and they didn't have enough weight to hold the door open on their own) No curriculum is going to be 100% error-free and self-explanatory. That's why we instructors still have jobs. Hal Logan Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty Computing and Engineering Technology Manatee Community College > -Original Message- > From: Jeff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 5:33 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: cisco academy's routing skills final ,tough!!! [7:29212] > > > I saw the Solaris cert project when netacad had just posted > the beta for > academys to review, and I took a recheck again recently. I honestly > believe they could have done a much better job with it. I > noticed alot of > the info was either incorrect, half right, or ass-backwards. > It's sort of like the web design cert. > Someone here please tell me why a Cisco network engineer needs a > certification of good practices with Adobe GoLive? > > I can understand trying to broaden your horizons, but the > solaris cert and > the adobe cert just were not at all up to the academys normal > standards. > > -jeff > > > > On Tue, 18 Dec 2001, Patricia Leeb-Hart wrote: > > > Thanks, Brian, for the sound advice. I've just finished > Semester 4 (though > > I got my CCNA a couple of months ago) and look forward to > Sem. 5. As I've > > stated before, I'm going the Academy route for cost > reasons, hands-on with > > an extensive lab but also to benefit from the interaction > between other > > students. They range in experience from an experienced > network consultant > > through guys and gals just a couple of years out of high > school to people > > making a mid-life career switch. One thing I will add to > your post is to > > stick with it, practice, practice, practice, do as much > labwork as you can. > > If possible, work with xNIX -- the Academy program is > expanding to include > a > > Solaris cert which I'm very excited about. This will get > you comfortable > > with CLI, scripting, and networking concepts like DNS > zones, DHCP, routing > > daemons, mail daemons, processes, debugging and generally > finding your way > > around a network.. Remember that a router is basically a dedicated > > computer. The broader the networking-related knowledge, > the better. From > > my experience, employers don't necessarily want someone > whose skills are > too > > tightly focussed on one platform, not to mention that you > won't be as > > effective in troubleshooting if all you know is the Cisco > Way. And one > last > > thing -- this is exciting stuff. It can be fun. Love the > technology, > > people. (it won't love you back, but it makes your job a lot more > enjoyable ) > > > > >>> "brian hall" 12/17/2001 7:48:19 PM >>> > > --minor snip-- > > I wanted it to be more of a heads up to all who are about > to take on sem5 > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=29808&t=29212 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Proper dress for CCIE lab? [7:29524]
I believe this shirt should be considered appropriate: http://www.thinkgeek.com/stuff/apparel/340c.shtml Maybe St. Nick will hook me up with one... ;) Hal Logan Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty Computing and Engineering Technology Manatee Community College > -Original Message- > From: Darren Crawford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:10 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Proper dress for CCIE lab? [7:29524] > > > Wear a Cisco shirt and kiss up to the proctor. > > D. > > At 05:00 PM 12/18/2001 -0500, Steven A. Ridder wrote: > >Is it true that you have to be dressed in a suit for the > CCIE lab? Do them > >mark mannerisms, speech and dress? I have some old Novell > guys telling me > >horror stories of the Novel Instructor Program. > > > >Steve > x$:0`0:$xx$:0`0:$xx$:0`0:$xx$:0`0:$x$:0`0:$xx$ > :0`0:$xx > > Lucent Technologies > NetworkCare Professional Services > http//www.lucent.com/netcare/ > Darren S. Crawford - CCNP, CCDP, CCIE TBA > > Northwest Region - Sacramento Office > Voicemail (916) 859-5200 x310 > Pager (800) 467-1467 > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > x$:0`0:$xx$:0`0:$xx$:0`0:$xx$:0`0:$x$:0`0:$xx$ > :0`0:$xx > > "You always have time for things you put first" - Tucker Resources Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=29809&t=29524 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: popularity of the CID test [7:31081]
I agree that the test is difficult, and I can understand someone being frustrated after taking it. When the correct answers aren't black-and-white, there's a lot more second-guessing that comes into play. IMO, in order to truly test a candidate's design abilities, every question would have to have a fifth multiple choice of "E: It depends" and a text box for the candidate to explain his or her answer. Of course, the grading of said exam wouldn't exactly be scalable... there would hafta be proctors reading through the responses and deciding if they're valid or not... but hey it'd be more jobs for CCDP's right? Ok, bad idea. But I think the subjectiveness of many of the questions is what makes the test difficult, and when you take the test you get to decide if you're reading too much into a question, or not reading enough. Hal Logan CCAI, CCDP, CCNP+Voice Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty Computing and Engineering Technology Manatee Community College > -Original Message- > From: Priscilla Oppenheimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 3:47 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: popularity of the CID test [7:31081] > > > I don't agree that the CID test is badly written, although I > have not seen > the new version. (Is it really bad and in what ways?) > > I do agree that the CID test uses a different model from most > of the other > tests. (CCIE written is somewhat similar to CID). The test > writer assumes > that you know the basic technology answer. To get the right > answer you have > to think past the obvious, basic answer and think about the > caveats, where > and how to deploy the protocol or feature, the scalability, > performance > issues, etc. Answering correctly requires two-step thinking. > People who > remember that when they take the test get a better score and > feel less > frustrated. > > I think the test isn't popular because Cisco needs companies > to train and > certify droves of technician drones. Only a few gurus get to > design or > redesign networks. ;-) The mass majority of people don't think > conceptually. A lot of schools these days focus on "how to" > rather than > creative, analytical thinking. I hope that changes and that > the comment > doesn't start a flame! > > Speaking of flames, however, I'm still burning from the > idiotic comment > someone made about one of our illustrious members not having > operational > experience. Whereas it wasn't true, it also missed the > opportunity to see > what a blessing it is to have a protocol designer amongst us. > It would be > as if James Watson dropped in on a discussion group for lab > technicians. Or > if Picasso dropped in on a discussion amongst Web-page > graphics developers. > > There's more to Cisco certification than getting a job that > will let you > wear a beeper and spend time fixing stuff. Hopefully, you'll > also get to > create stuff. CCDPs and CCIEs get to do analytical, > innovative, strategic > work in addition to operational, tactical, configuration > work. And that's > where the adventurous, fun aspects of this industry come into play! > > Priscilla > > > At 12:06 PM 1/7/02, Robert Padjen wrote: > >I am also quite surprised at the reality and > >perception regarding this exam. Based on book sales, > >there is a lot of interest in design (not as much as > >CCNA unfortunately), but the corporate environment > >stressed the CCIE and only looked to the CCNP. I think > >this was due to two factors. First, testers didn't > >push the DP track (whether it was the DA or the DP - I > >would contend both) and business don't seem to stress > >the design component outside of the carrier space and > >more tech-driven Fortune 500. The second is the > >perception that the exam is hard, which is the focus > >of this board. > > > >I would argue, failures aside, that the test is hard > >because it is badly written and it focuses on a > >different model then the other exams/tracks. As such, > >preparation should do it, or at least get an applicant > >close. The poor quality of the exam (both versions) is > >a bit of a tweak for me, as it made writing a book on > >the exam more difficult - one had to focus on the test > >passing and the 'correct, non-Cisco answer' > >concurrently. The reality is that Cisco should again > >revise this exam and review the design tracks, in my > >opinion, although with the CCIE now a one day exam and > >other factors I doubt this will happen. > > > > > >--- "Steven A. Ridder" > >wrote: > > > It was the only test I ever failed. If you ask me, > > > there's not much market > > > demand for CCDP's (which makes the test a low > > > priority), and for the amount > > > you have to study to pass the test, it's not worth > > > it. It's good to learn > > > though, because it covers a lot of broad topics, > > > from SNA to ATM LANE, > > > AppleTalk, etc. > > > > > > Have fun at it. Study the BPX and IGX. > > > > > > > >
RE: CCIE Lab Waiting Period [7:32232]
I ran into the same thing in November, July 18 was the earliest date I could get. I'm wondering if their system was revamped, or if they just added more seats? Either way, I've already scheduled mine for July, and while I'm tempted to move it up, I'm going to just take the extra prep time. > -Original Message- > From: Darrell Newcomb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 9:22 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: CCIE Lab Waiting Period [7:32232] > > > Now you have me interested since I haven't found much of any time to > prepare for and thus schedule the lab. I logged in and in March see > sparse(if any) availability all the way to July. Argh! Time > for me to > fish or cut bait this quarter. > > So that answers Ed's question that he could run in and take the exams > quickly. But it seems as Chuck is pointing out that since > March on were > based on the 1 day schedule that things will change soon. > > Chuck Larrieu wrote: > > > > Dare I release my currently scheduled date so I can look? ;-> > > > > the rule of thumb is that you can book a date this week or > in six months, > > but nothing in between. > > > > Also, I believe Cisco is opening up dates on a month by > month basis. In > > other words, say for the month of February the schedule was > based on the > two > > day lab. So in late January Cisco opens up the 14 days > formerly reserved > for > > the second day of the two day lab. So for a very brief > period of time there > > are a number of openings available in February. This was > certainly true a > > couple of months ago when I was trying to book my next attempt. > > > > Chuck > > > > ""Darrell Newcomb"" wrote in message > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > I was presently surprised to see quite a lot of > availability for Lab > > > testing in San Jose. I'll let others comment on > comparing to other > > > exams. > > > > > > Ed Chuchaisri wrote: > > > > > > > > Guys, > > > > > > > > I wonder when is the earliest R/S lab available in San > Jose if I passed > > the > > > > written today? I heard that it still takes at least 6 > months even > > though > > > > Cisco has changed the lab to a 1-day format. > > > > > > > > And how do you compared the written exam to other Cisco > Exam like CID > > 3.0 > > > (I > > > > think this is the most challenging one out there), > Routing 2.0, and > > > > switching 2.0. Is it true that written exam for R/S is > the combination > > of > > > > Routing 2.0 and switching 2.0 together. How many > questions by the way? > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > Ed > > > > www.router4u.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=32340&t=32232 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: router web interface [7:32495]
Besides not being very useful in the first place, it presents a security risk on an unpatched IOS: http://www.securityfocus.com/cgi-bin/vulns-item.pl?section=discussion&id =2936 (Watch the wrap) Hal Logan Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty Computing and Engineering Technology Manatee Community College > -Original Message- > From: Chuck Larrieu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 12:22 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: OT: router web interface [7:32495] > > > I set this up for kicks on one of my routers. have just one question: > > is this it? > > let's call this one a stupid router trick. it seems far more > cumbersome than > it is worth. > > JMHO > > Chuck Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=32503&t=32495 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: DTE/DCE definitions ? CCAI woes. [7:32924]
IMO, you can get away with saying that the distinction between DCE and DTE equipment only applies to WANs, but only because everything on the LAN side would be considered DTE equipment. The pitfall that students get presented with has to do with the labs they do in semester 2. It's the first semester of the Netacad curriculum where they actually configure routers, and they start looking for patterns when they do their cabling, particularly connecting ethernet interfaces and computer NICs. A very common conclusion that they draw is, "Routers and PC's are DTE, so switches and hubs must be DCE. When I plug DTE equipment into DCE equipment, I need to use a patch cable. If I'm going from DTE to DTE, I need a crossover cable." That will work for 90% of the cabling that they do in semester 2, but there are two side effects that I try to head off. The first one is, uplink ports on hubs and/or switches don't fit nicely into the router/hub = dte/dce view. While it isn't exactly a high-performance networking setup, the majority of my students find themselves in an environment that uses cascading hubs at some point or another, and it doesn't do them any good to know how to configure routers if they botch the wiring of thier hubs. The second, and in my opinion worse, side effect is that the students at some level group hubs, switches, and CSU's together as DCE equipment, and in my experience that causes confusion later on in semester 4 (and semester 6 if I understand Tom correctly; my site isn't a CCNP academy so I wouldn't know) when they actually learn about WAN equipment. Meanwhile I think poor Phil's learning a very harsh lesson: Never ask a question on Groupstudy unless you're prepared for several LONG answers. ;) Cheers, Hal Logan CCAI, CCDP, CCNP+Voice Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty Computing and Engineering Technology Manatee Community College > -Original Message- > From: Priscilla Oppenheimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 3:37 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: DTE/DCE definitions ? CCAI woes. [7:32924] > > > It's tempting to say that the terms DTE and DCE only apply to > WANs, but, in > fact, IEEE uses the term DTE to refer to stations, nodes, > hosts that reside > on LANs. When talking about "interconnect" devices, they call > them by their > actual name, such as repeater or bridge. I don't think they > ever use the > term DCE, although IEEE documents don't have indexes, so it's > hard to say > for sure. Argh. > > Does Cisco Networking Academy spell out DCE correctly (per > ITU-T) as Data > Circuit-Terminating Equipment? If so, that might help explain the > difference. In LANs, we have end-to-end virtual circuits > (with TCP, etc.) > The "terminating" devices are the end points themselves. (Make those > students learn a little TCP while you're at it?? ;-) One > really couldn't > claim that a LAN repeater, bridge, switch, or router > terminates a circuit > (with the exception of kludges like local ACK with LLC2.) > Well, I'm getting > beyond Cisco Academy here. ;-) > > With WANs, there is an actual circuit that implements the > user-network > interface between the DTE and DCE. Consider what happens when > you make a > phone call. The local phone switch at the Central Office provides > dial-tone, accepts dialed numbers, etc. That switch makes a > network-network > connection to another switch, which has a local connection to > the called > party. This is how WANs work also. They have a telephony > legacy, after all. > > LANs don't really behave like this, (although you could say that the > initial ARP to find the MAC address of the default gateway is > analogous to > the call setup protocols in WANs.) In general, however, a LAN > device makes > a "call" to another LAN device across the network. The devices in the > middle just act as relays. They don't communicate directly > with the end > devices; they just forward packets between end devices. ARP, > ICMP, and IGMP > are exceptions to this, but I wouldn't mention that right away when > teaching academy students. > > Howard Berkowitz has a "grand unifying theory" that compares > and contrasts > LANs and WANs and uses the terminology in a unifying and > elegant way. See > the first chapter of his book WAN Solutions Guide for a > summarized view of > his grand theory. He may have written it up in a Group Study > response in > the past also. See the archives. > > Hey, how did you get the CCAI gig? You seem very well > qualified for it. > Good luck with it. > > Priscilla > > > > At 07:47 AM 1/23/02, Phil Barker wrote: > >Hi group, > > > >I have just started teaching as a CCAI and was asked > >the following question yesterday in class. > > > >One student pointed out that the Sem 2 curriculum > >states that all devices on the LAN side of a > >connection are DTE's. > > > >I disagree with this statement. > > > >If we take a switch and a PC(DTE)
RE: Router is not installing the better route [7:33102]
First thing you'll want to do is check the serial interface on router E that connects to the frame cloud, and make sure it has the command "bandwidth 384" on it. hth, Hal > -Original Message- > From: Ali, Abbas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 1:52 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Router is not installing the better route [7:33102] > > > I have a router in my main office which is connected to four different > locations through full T1 for each location. > > For example, > > Router A: Main office router > Router B: Branch B > Router C: Branch C > Router D: Branch D > Router E: Branch E > > All the branch routers are also connected through Frame-Relay > Cloud in a > full mesh topology and each has a bandwidth of 384KB. I am > running EIGRP > Network. In EIGRP routing, it always installs the route based on the > bandwidth regardless of hop counts. The problem here I see > that the router > in branch E has installed a route to Branch B through > Frame-Relay Cloud > instead of picking up the better bandwidth link which is T1 > to Main Office > and then again T1 to the Branch E. But instead it installed the route > through Frame-Relay cloud which is directly connected to > Branch E as it is a > full mesh network. > > Can someone shed some lights on it? > > > Regards, > > AA Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=33108&t=33102 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Blown Away By The New CCIE Written [7:62396]
Todd, here's something that may help a little... Bill Parkhurst's take on the IE Written at Networkers last year was something to the tune of, "The purpose of the written exam is to test things that we simply can't test on the lab." Just think of the written as a box that you have to check before you can take the lab. Studying for the written is NOT the same as studying for the lab... the two are totally different animals. Incidentally, I noticed Dennis Laganiere also replied to this thread. I downloaded the Boson test he wrote the day of my lab, and it was a great help. Assuming that it's been updated for the new test, I highly recommend that you use it to test yourself maybe a day or two before your next attempt. Good luck, Hal Logan Network Specialist Computing & Engineering Technology Manatee Community College > -Original Message- > From: Panella Todd [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 6:03 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Blown Away By The New CCIE Written [7:62396] > > > Has anyone taken the new format of the written test? I just > got my head > handed to me. Needed a 58 to pass and got a 47. I > definitely studied the > wrong material. I thought the test would emphasize OSPF, > BGP, WAN and the > basic Routing Protocol interaction. Boy was I wrong. 75% of > the test was > Multicast, IPX, Token Ring and QoS. I studied QoS pretty > well, but slacked > a bit on Multicast and totally wrote off Token Ring or IPX. > Ooops$300 > down the drain. Anyone else have a similiar experience? As > far as what I > used, I thought the "official CCIE R&S Exam Cert. Guide" > would be enough. > Uhh, that's a big NO! Bruno and clan don't even cover half > of what was on > this test. Anyone else recommend something different for > next time? Should > I just say No to all books and print out all the links on the > Exam blueprint > page? I think that's what I'm going to do this time, oh, that and > concentrate on useless protocols. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=62455&t=62396 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: CCIE Lab - I have seen he future and it is.... [7:62776]
I disagree, it sounds to me like Chuck is pursuing the IE for the right reasons. If his goal was to learn enough to pass the lab, and he has learned most of what he set out to learn, I can't really fault him for being discouraged. It's very frustrating having spent months or even years learning how to do 4-way IGP redistribution with no routing loops and all those other difficult but possible scenarios we subject ourself to, only to fail the lab because in a low-time high-stress environment you couldn't think of which OSPF over frame config would meet the bassackwards requirements on the lab. It's Cisco's program, and they can do whatever they want with it. But my learning curve has drastically changed since I started studying for the lab, and there are other pursuits that I'd like to go after once I'm done with the lab. Really my primary motivation at this point is that I'm not a quitter, and I want to finish what I started. I'm not pursuing the IE so I can get a better job or so I can get promoted at my current one. I teach CCNA and CCNP classes, and when I pass the lab I'll still be teaching CCNA and CCNP classes. Having studied for the lab helps me do a much better job as an instructor, but having a number behind my name won't make a lick of difference to anyone but me. > -Original Message- > From: Amazing [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, February 10, 2003 11:13 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: CCIE Lab - I have seen he future and it is [7:62776] > > > actually, i think you have it backwardsthe CCNP of > tomorrow will be the > CCIE of todayCCC tests are getting harder...the bar is > being raised > > if what you state is truly the way you truly feel, then you > were in pursuit > of the CCIE for the wrong reason in the first place. > > sorry you're so depressed. > > > ""Charles Riley"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > Chuck, > > > > Your post reminds me of those weird little ice cream stands that I > sometimes > > see at the mall and various carnivals. It's called something like > "Dipping > > Dots - The Ice Cream of the Future". The initial human > instinct is much > > like the Cro-Magnon humanoids encountering the monolith at > the beginning > of > > 2001: A Space Odyssey (sp): jump up and down with > excitement until you > > realize it's just freeze dried ice cream. > > > > Rounding out that analogy, the CCIE of the future will > probably be reduced > > to being the CCNP of today. Regardless, I have spent too > much time and > > money to abandon the quest for CCIE now, but frankly, if I > hadn't invested > > as much as I have, I would most likely abandon the quest in favor of > > broadening into other areas. I really don't see much > market value for the > > CCIE anymore, especially with Cisco hellbent on making it a > meatgrinding > > cash cow. Your java console and "one way only to configure" > experience > kind > > of bears this out. > > > > Sorry for the depressing post, just wanted to share. > > > > Charles > > > > > > > > > > > > ""The Long and Winding Road"" wrote in > > message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > Been spending this weekend on what was once the Cisco Advanced SE > Training > > > ( ASET ) set of labs. These are available for those whose > Cisco account > > team > > > approves - there are a few conditions which can be found > in the wee > places > > > of certification training. > > > > > > The program is run by Lab Gear ( the only link I have is > www.labgear.net, > > > but > > > this is a login page ) There are a number of labs of CCIE > level, look, > and > > > feel. > > > > > > Supposed to be real equipment, but the access is via java script > windows, > > > not terminal emulation. This makes for some interesting > situations. The > > > windows show or provide output only when they are active. > So if you had > > two > > > router sessions open, and you made changes on one router > that would > > generate > > > systems messages of one sort or another you would not see > those messages > > on > > > the other. also, I have yet to find a way to generate output from > > debugging > > > commands. Things like term mon and logging of one kind or > another have > not > > > been successful. so no debug ip routing and debug ip ospf adj. > > > > > > As with the real lab, there are a series of tasks to be completed. > Grading > > > is done via a script. This is the point of most > interest. Actually, I > > > suspect a lot of the current CCIE Lab grading is done > using scripting > > tools. > > > I believe the proctors still physically examine equipment > configurations > > for > > > some things, but I could be wrong. > > > > > > It is of interest because to judge from the script > outputs I am seeing, > > > there appears to be an assumption that there is one and > only one way to > do > > > things. I'm not sure this is always true. I am not sure that this >
RE: Why disable cdp for back-to-back serial connec [7:62798]
Over a leased line I can't see the harm in leaving it running. If someone manages to get into your router, there's very little target enumeration they can do with CDP that can't be done by other means. Since the point-to-point link is likely to have a /30 (or /31 if they're running 12.2) mask on it, it's not going to be a stretch to figure out the other router's IP. While disabling CDP is certainly a sound practice on LAN interfaces, we also disable it on our switched WAN connections on general principles. That isn't a magic bullet by any means though, disabling CDP is security through obscurity more than anything else. If you're concerned about unauthorized access to your routers, then you should consider running access classes on your vty lines and AAA so you can audit access to the routers, if you aren't already. > -Original Message- > From: Priscilla Oppenheimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 1:12 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Why disable cdp for back-to-back serial connec [7:62798] > > > Lawrence Law wrote: > > > > Dear Priscilla, > > > > Thank you for your clear explaination. > > > > May be it is better to disable cdp for low speed link, and > > security issue. > > CDP uses very little bandwidth, so unless it's a really > low-speed link, I > wouldn't turn it off for that reason. Regarding security, if > it's a private > point-to-point HDLC link, then security probably isn't too > much of an issue. > It would be hard for a hacker to see the packets. > > On the other hand, if the hacker somehow got into a router > that was running > CDP on any of its interfaces, then the hacker could learn > about one or more > additional routers, and that's not good. You want to limit > how much a hacker > can learn. > > It's sort of a close call since CDP is so helpful for troubleshooting, > though. How about the rest of you out there? Do you disable > CDP like some > security documents say to do? > > If often occurs to me these days that we spent the '80s and > '90s developing > all sorts of cool protocols to share info of all sorts, and > were spending > the '00s disabling most of them for security reasons. It's a > crazy world we > live in. > > Priscilla > > > > > > Regards, > > Lawrence > > > > > > > > ""Priscilla Oppenheimer"" wrote in > > message > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > Cisco Discovery Protocol (CDP) is a managment protocol that > > allows routers > > > and switches to tell each other about their IOS version, > > hardware > > platform, > > > and basic config info. Some security experts say to disable > > it because it > > > tells too much. > > > > > > It has nothing to do with bringing the serial interface > > up/up. You could > > use > > > it or you could not. The two routers on the HDLC link don't > > have to agree. > > > One could send CDP while the other doesn't and the link > > should still come > > > up/up, assuming everything is OK at the physical and > > data-link layers. > > > > > > It's too bad they used "no cdp enable" in that simple example > > with no > > > explanation. I don't think it's the default? So someone had > > to type it in, > > > so they should have explained it. > > > > > > Priscilla > > > > > > > > > Lawrence Law wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear all, > > > > > > > > > > > > From cisco configuration example > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk713/tk317/technologies_confi guration_examp > > > le09186a00800944ff.shtml > > > > > > I'm wondering that the line "no cdp enable" is required > for > > > both router > > > in order to make a serial connection up for back-to-back > > > connection. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Lawrence Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=62825&t=62798 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: CCIE Lab - I have seen he future and it is.... [7:62776]
I think your problem with the dipping dots analogy is that dipping dots have to be served from the bottom up; there's no such thing as Top-Down Dipping Dot Design. Hal > -Original Message- > From: Priscilla Oppenheimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 2:39 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: CCIE Lab - I have seen he future and it is [7:62776] > > > Glad you're not depressed and are continuing your quest. You > should consider > being a writer. Your writing is really good, although the > dipping dots ice > cream analogy is just not working for me. I just can't > imagine freeze-dried > ice cream for one thing. Does it use dotted-decimal notation? ;-) > > Priscilla > > Charles Riley wrote: > > > > Thanks to all who wrote in. My Kafkaseque post yesterday > > apparently touched > > a chord (or nerve) with several folks. I was hoping to start > > an OT > > discussion on those Dippin' Dots ice cream, and draw analogies > > to > > networking. Heck, I would even settle for Howard asking a > > variation of his > > favorite question: "what is the ice cream you are trying to > > eat?" > > > > In all seriousness, I haven't abandoned all hope yet, it has > > just lessened > > in importance and intensity for me. In response to CN's > > question, I have > > attempted the lab at least once, Brussels, way back when the > > lab was a two > > day lab, and the numbers were still quad digits.Without > > violating the NDA, > > let's just say that I will never forgive ISDN for what it did > > to me. > > > > As far as my motives for CCIE chasing, the main reason I am > > persisting is > > that not only have I invested time, money, and freeze dried ice > > cream, but > > the CCIE quest motivates me to study topics that I don't > > necessarily deal > > with on a daily basis, and to practice exotic configurations > > with those that > > I do. OSPF through a GRE tunnel over an ISDN DBU to the > > Dippin' Dots > > website, anyone? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Charles > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ""Cisco Nuts"" wrote in message > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > Hello Charles, > > > > > > With due respect I ask, why did you abandon your quest for > > the CCIE? I am > > > curious as to how many times you actually hit the Lab? > > > > > > Sincerely, > > > > > > CN > > > > > > >From: "Charles Riley" >Reply-To: "Charles Riley" >To: > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: CCIE Lab - I have seen he > > future and > > > it is [7:62776] >Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 22:19:54 GMT > > > >Chuck, > > > > >Your post reminds me of those weird little ice cream stands > > that I > > > sometimes >see at the mall and various carnivals. It's called > > something > > > like "Dipping >Dots - The Ice Cream of the Future". The > > initial human > > > instinct is much >like the Cro-Magnon humanoids encountering > > the monolith > > > at the beginning of >2001: A Space Odyssey (sp): jump up and > > down with > > > excitement until you >realize it's just freeze dried ice > > cream. > > > > >Rounding out that analogy, the CCIE of the future will > > probably be > > > reduced >to being the CCNP of today. Regardless, I have spent > > too much > > > time and >money to abandon the quest for CCIE now, but > > frankly, if I > > > hadn't invested >as much as I have, I would most likely > > abandon the quest > > > in favor of >broadening into other areas. I really don't see > > much market > > > value for the >CCIE anymore, especially with Cisco hellbent > > on making it > > > a meatgrinding >cash cow. Your java console and "one way only > > to > > > configure" experience kind >of bears this out. > >Sorry for > > the > > > depressing post, just wanted to share. > >Charles > > > > > > > >""The Long > > > and Winding Road"" wrote in >message > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > Been > > spending this > > > weekend on what was once the Cisco Advanced SE Training > > ( > > ASET ) set > > > of labs. These are available for those whose Cisco account > > >team > > > > > approves - there are a few conditions which can be found in > > the wee > > > places > > of certification training. > > > > The program is > > run by Lab > > > Gear ( the only link I have is www.labgear.net, > > but > > > > this is a > > > login page ) There are a number of labs of CCIE level, look, > > and > > > > > feel. > > > > Supposed to be real equipment, but the access > > is via java > > > script windows, > > not terminal emulation. This makes for > > some > > > interesting situations. The > > windows show or provide > > output only when > > > they are active. So if you had >two > > router sessions open, > > and you > > > made changes on one router that would >generate > > systems > > messages of > > > one sort or another you would not see those messages >on > > > > the other. > > > also, I have yet to find a way to generate output from > > >debugging > > > > > commands. Things like term mon and l
RE: New Instructor Experiences [7:62826]
Hey man it happens. Some days it's like you've got a tap running into the hoover dam, and it's your job to make sure everyone gets an 8 oz. glass of water. Other days you've got that tap up and running, and the students want to know about the Gulf of Mexico. My advice would be, if you have another session with these same people, and if the next session is relevant to your recent one that didn't go so hot, start off asking a couple questions of the group that relate to the last session. There are many topics in networking that just don't sink in after only one exposure, and there's nothing wrong with somebody not picking everything up the first time. Hell, you can even make fun of yourself if you're comfortable doing it. On more than a couple occasions when I've covered ISDN and interesting traffic, I've had to stop and say "Hey, who's the idiot that taught you guys access lists???" The other thing I do to gauge how much is getting absorbed is constantly encourage students to ask questions. They'll tell you what they don't get, but they do so by asking questions. By the way, if you find that you enjoy teaching, you might want to see if there's a college in the area that participates in the Cisco Networking Academy Program. Most community colleges love getting adjunct instructors who have current industry experience. Good luck, Hal Logan CCAI -Original Message- > From: John Neiberger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 5:12 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: OT: New Instructor Experiences [7:62826] > > > I just feel the need to rant/vent for a bit and I knew there were a > bunch of you who might be able to relate to this. I've > started teaching > a short, one-session general networking class for some of the people > here at the bank. The first session, which was really just a > runthrough > with a handful of students, went fairly well. In fact, it > went so well > that they increased the number of overall attendees to about 60 or so. > > Last week I had another session that went exceptionally well, except > for a couple of students who really didn't want to be there. > I couldn't > have asked for it to go better, and my boss heard lots of good things > about it. One person even said I should be a professor! :-) > Now, that > brings us to today > > Today I had an afternoon class, and in my opinion it sucked rotten > eggs. I feel embarrassed to have been involved with it.I can't > think of too many ways in which it could have gone worse. I > rambled, I > flew through 2.5 hours of material in about an hour, I lost my place a > lot. I'm not certain that I ever formed a train of thought > longer than > a couple of cars, and I think even those trains were without > engine and > caboose. > > Have any of you other instructors had days like that? As I even > mentioned in class, I felt like my 'explainer' was broken > today, and it > certainly was. I'm hoping that I could get some sympathy from other > instructors with similar experiences. > > Okay, I'm going to go drown my disappointment in some coffee! > > John Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=62836&t=62826 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: \31 Mak could it be used on leased lines(serial) [7:62853]
It's a feature supported in 12.2. http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/iosswrel/ps1839/products_feature_guide09186a0080087aeb.html Hal > -Original Message- > From: Monu Sekhon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 1:30 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: \31 Mak could it be used on leased lines(serial) [7:62853] > > > Hi Harold/all, > > In your description u mentioned that u can use /31 mask also, > > Your comments: > "Since the point-to-point link is likely to have a /30 (or > /31 if they're > running 12.2) mask on it" > > > questions is > - > > -will the connection work , till now i only know that 30 is > the max mask > used on serial lines .how will we use this 31 mask > - Does this applies only in ios version 12.2 or later as mentioned. > - Do people use these 31 mask > - Can anybody provide me any inf & link > > Thanx in Advance > (Please refer the description below in thread he mentioned that.) > > > > Over a leased line I can't see the harm in leaving it > running. If someone > manages to get into your router, there's very little target > enumeration they > can do with CDP that can't be done by other means. Since the > point-to-point > link is likely to have a /30 (or /31 if they're running 12.2) > mask on it, > it's not going to be a stretch to figure out the other router's IP. > > While disabling CDP is certainly a sound practice on LAN > interfaces, we also > disable it on our switched WAN connections on general > principles. That isn't > a magic bullet by any means though, disabling CDP is security through > obscurity more than anything else. If you're concerned about > unauthorized > access to your routers, then you should consider running > access classes on > your vty lines and AAA so you can audit access to the > routers, if you aren't > already. > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Priscilla Oppenheimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 1:12 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: Why disable cdp for back-to-back serial connec > [7:62798] > > > > > > Lawrence Law wrote: > > > > > > Dear Priscilla, > > > > > > Thank you for your clear explaination. > > > > > > May be it is better to disable cdp for low speed link, and > > > security issue. > > > > CDP uses very little bandwidth, so unless it's a really > > low-speed link, I > > wouldn't turn it off for that reason. Regarding security, if > > it's a private > > point-to-point HDLC link, then security probably isn't too > > much of an issue. > > It would be hard for a hacker to see the packets. > > > > On the other hand, if the hacker somehow got into a router > > that was running > > CDP on any of its interfaces, then the hacker could learn > > about one or more > > additional routers, and that's not good. You want to limit > > how much a hacker > > can learn. > > > > It's sort of a close call since CDP is so helpful for > troubleshooting, > > though. How about the rest of you out there? Do you disable > > CDP like some > > security documents say to do? > > > > If often occurs to me these days that we spent the '80s and > > '90s developing > > all sorts of cool protocols to share info of all sorts, and > > were spending > > the '00s disabling most of them for security reasons. It's a > > crazy world we > > live in. > > > > Priscilla > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > Lawrence > > > > > > > > > > > > ""Priscilla Oppenheimer"" wrote in > > > message > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > > Cisco Discovery Protocol (CDP) is a managment protocol that > > > allows routers > > > > and switches to tell each other about their IOS version, > > > hardware > > > platform, > > > > and basic config info. Some security experts say to disable > > > it because it > > > > tells too much. > > > > > > > > It has nothing to do with bringing the serial interface > > > up/up. You could > > > use > > > > it or you could not. The two routers on the HDLC link don't > > > have to agree. > > > > One could send CDP while the other doesn't and the link > > > should still come > > > > up/up, assuming everything is OK at the physical and > > > data-link layers. > > > > > > > > It's too bad they used "no cdp enable" in that simple example > > > with no > > > > explanation. I don't think it's the default? So someone had > > > to type it in, > > > > so they should have explained it. > > > > > > > > Priscilla > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawrence Law wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From cisco configuration example > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk713/tk317/technologies_confi > guration_examp > > > > le09186a00800944ff.shtml > > > > > > > > I'm wondering that the line "no cdp enable" is required > > for > > > > both router > > > > in order to make
RE: can u summarize area 0 [7:63365]
This is something we discussed on groupstudy a while back. IIRC, the area 0 range command will work, and you can summarize backbone routes as they're advertised to other areas. The question is, why? (other than to satisfy a bass-ackwards lab requirement) If your IP addressing has been designed properly, routes should really be as summarized as they can be by the time they get to area 0. Likewise, if you want to reduce the number of routes in your non-backbone areas, OSPF has tools built into it for exactly that purpose, ie stub and totally stub areas. So it's not that you couldn't, but there are better ways of doing it. Hal > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2003 12:25 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: can u summarize area 0 [7:63365] > > > That question was on my notes last days. I did a lab, > because I never saw > the efect of area 0 summarization. Area 0 networks are > forwarded to other > areas (if the other areas are normal areas - no stub). So, > if you do not > summarize, area 1routers (for example) will receive IA > routes from area 0 > for each link. > > > > > > > "neil K." @groupstudy.com em 19/02/2003 13:52:58 > > Favor responder a "neil K." > > Enviado Por: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Para: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > cc: > > Assunto:can u summarize area 0 [7:63365] > > > Folks, > > Can area 0 be summarized in OSPF ? > > Thanks, > > Neil Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=63438&t=63365 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Who likes BGP? [7:64132]
In my uneducated opinion, it seems to me like there are much larger concerns out there than BGP security. I say uneducated because I haven't worked for an ISP, nor have I worked for any other organization that would run BGP. My BGP experience consists of reading and lab work, that's it. I'm a Cisco Network Academy instructor, and the majority of my experience is from lab work and consulting. I'm teaching my first CCNP Routing class starting next week, so any input from those in the know would be appreciated. Hell, I'll appreciate input from those not in the know, I'm not picky... just don't expect me to take it as gospel truth. When I tell a router to peer with another BGP speaker, I can put restrictions on it. I can tell it what AS paths I'll accept from that peer, and what prefixes I'll accept from that peer. If I'm an ISP peering with a customer who has the class C network 210.5.5.0 assigned to them, do I not have a responsibility to configure my BGP router to ignore any BGP advertisements from that customer that are not advertising 210.5.5.0? I know that no one is going to hold me to it, it's not like the IETF has a squad of mercenaries who are going to kick the door in and check my configs, but doesn't that responsibility fall to both the customer and the ISP? Sorry if I'm off base here, but that's my basic understanding of how things work; the customer has a responsibility to only advertise their networks, and the ISP has a responsibility to only accept advertisements for that customer's networks. Does the same relationship exist among ISPs, or do things get too complex to filter updates at that point? It seems like the "security hole" in BGP is the human that configures a BGP router to accept any route it gets. Thoughts? Hal Logan CCAI, CCDP, CCNP: Voice Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty Computing & Engineering Technology Manatee Community College > -Original Message- > From: Edwin R. Gonzalez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, February 28, 2003 11:39 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Who likes BGP? [7:64132] > > > Hey, > > It's your friendly neighborhood CISCO MAN! > Sorry, it's Friday night, I'm still at work with a coffee > buzz that might last me until the morning. > > I came across this article that might be of interest to > some people, check it out; > http://news.com.com/2100-1009-990608.html?tag=fd_lede1_hed > > > > -- > _ > The harder you work, the luckier you get! > _ > The only place success comes before > work is in the dictionary!!! > _ Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=64153&t=64132 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: I need help ... Veteran's benefit again [7:64484]
A few years ago I spoke to a VA administrator who told me that it is possible for a training company to become VA accredited, but it requires the sponsorship of a VA accredited college or university. The best I can suggest is to check out colleges and universities in your area for close-to-CCIE level training. I teach at a CCNP Cisco Network Academy in BRadenton, FL, and it seems to me like the CCNP curriculum is not very far below the CCIE level of expertise. It certainly doesn't cover all of the IE topics, but Network Academy students are expected to do many of the things in their studies that are expected of aspiring IEs: they are expected to not only learn the basics of the protocols and technologies covered, but also how they work and, more importantly, how they don't work. Most CCNP Academy sites are community colleges, and of course you can get VA bennies through them. Also, some of the academies out there offer more advanced training than the CCNP classes. In Florida I know that both St. Petersburg College and Florida Community College Jacksonville offer Voice and Security classes, and SPC also runs several IE level classes. hth, Hal Logan CCAI, CCDP, CCNP: Voice Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty Computing & Engineering Technology Manatee Community College > -Original Message- > From: s vermill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 3:38 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: I need help ... Veteran's benefit again [7:64484] > > > The guy in Sunny Southwest Florida wrote: > > > > Does anyone know of a company that will take Veterans Benefits > > for the CCIE > > lab training? I called the Veterans office, they don't know. > > I called a > > few training companies ... Knowledgenet, CCprep and others ... > > > > > > I know this isn't a technical question, but it is a CCIE lab > > question. > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > If you poke around the VA website, you're likely to find that > training isn't > covered. The VA only recently started reimbursing exam/lab > expenses. I > don't have a url handy at the moment, but I have researched > this in the past > and I found that non-accredited training usually isn't > covered by standard > VA benefits (GI Bill, etc). If you're being rehabilitated > for a disability, > that may be a different story. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=64655&t=64484 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: EIGRP for CCIE Written [7:64707]
The most correct answer, IMO, is that EIGRP is an enhanced distance vector protocol. Were I taking a cisco exam though, out of your two choices I'd go with hybrid. > -Original Message- > From: Johan Bornman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 7:11 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: EIGRP for CCIE Written [7:64707] > > > Is EIGRP a Hybrid or Distance Vector protocol? Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=64726&t=64707 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Last topic for tonight - Soltie's Book [7:64882]
There are a few minor mistakes in Solie's book, but I have found it to be very useful. I didn't care for the scenarios at the end of his book, but the exercises that accompany each chapter are excellent exercises for a candidate to go through while getting ready for the lab. It's obvious that he put a lot of work into the book. > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of > Juan Blanco > Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 7:53 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Last topic for tonight - Soltie's Book [7:64882] > > > Church, > I had being eating, drinking, sleeping.Solie, Caslow, > Halabi, Parkhurst, > Doyle and others books > as well for the last two months, and I came to the conclusion > that Solie and > Caslow book has > the same foundation or I will say using the same techniques, > both books are > great to the point > that I may have to buy one of them again because I had used > them too many > times it is already damage... > BTW Jeff Doyle Volume II looks like the continuation of Solie > Book (very > interesting)... > > Juan Blanco > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of > The Long and Winding Road > Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 3:57 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Last topic for tonight - Soltie's Book [7:64882] > > > I've waffled on this one before. But lately I've been > spending more time > with Soltie ( CCIE Practical Studies, Volume 1 ) > > Previously, I've said the jury is still out on this one. > > Now that I've given Mr. Soltie his due, I am finding this is > a very good > book, and well worth considering when choosing CCIE prep books. > > In fact, if I dare say so, I am finding that Mr. Soltie is much more > effective than is Mr. Caslow. > > Anyone else finding the same? > > Good night, everyone. > > Chuck > > -- > TANSTAAFL > "there ain't no such thing as a free lunch" > [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=64905&t=64882 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Load Balancing and NAT [7:64904]
I have a question about this setup, but it's more deisgn-oriented than configuration. What's the benefit of having redundant ISPs if they both connect to one router? I realize that a WAN circuit is more likely to have problems than the router hardware is, but it seems like both the configuration problem and the single point of failure can be addressed by adding a second router. From there, I see two options. #1, break up the LAN into two DHCP scopes (if DHCP is used) and assign the IP's of both routers as the default gateway, but alternate them. Scope 1 would have R1's IP as the primary default gateway, and R2's as the secondary, and vice versa for scope 2. #2, Use a layer 3 switch at the core of the LAN, and configure routed ports. Give the switch two default routes with the same AD, and it will load balance between the two routers. Does either of these sound feasible? Hal > -Original Message- > From: Terry Oldham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 11:07 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Load Balancing and NAT [7:64904] > > > The T1's are from different providers, Qwest and Sprint. And > no we will not > be running BGP... > > > ""Troy Leliard"" wrote in message > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > First big question, are your T1's from the same provider, or from a > > different provider, and thus different "public" ip address > space? If it > is > > from a different provider, you may well run into some > problems with NAT. > > > > Say for example, client A connects to your webserver (via > ISP A's public > IP > > address that is assigned to you, say x.x.x.x) which is then > Nat'd to your > > internal RFC1918 address That will work all fine and > dandy, but what > about > > if your default gateway is ISP B's T1. Outbound packets, > returning to > > Client A, will be NAT'd to ISB B's outside address, say y.y.y.y. If > Client > > A is behind a stateful firewall, return packets will be > dropped, as it > will > > have ISP B's SRC address, and it will be expecting ISP A's. > > > > There are a number of ways around this, but I will wait for > more detauls > > before going on. Presumably you are not / will not be > running BGP, and > have > > your own AS? > > > > Terry Oldham wrote: > > > > > > Hello all, > > > > > > I am attempting to setup a Cisco 1721 Router with load > > > balancing and > > > NAT so that we can provide a dual T1 connection to the network. > > > This is the > > > first time I have done anything like this and I was wanting to > > > know if > > > anyone had any good pointers they could give me or any commands > > > that I > > > should beware of or add. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Terry O Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=64930&t=64904 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Good book for CCIE Written Prep [7:65104]
Dennis, Has your Boson test been updated for the new written? I found your old test very helpful when I took the old written, and I have a friend who is getting ready for the new one. Thanks, Hal Logan CCAI, CCDP, CCNP: Voice Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty Computing & Engineering Technology Manatee Community College > -Original Message- > From: Dennis Laganiere [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 10:51 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Good book for CCIE Written Prep [7:65104] > > > I recently revised the list of the book I thought were useful > for this exam > at www.laganiere.net, let me know if you find it useful... > > --- Dennis Laganiere > > - Original Message - > From: "Troy Leliard" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 12:44 AM > Subject: RE: Good book for CCIE Written Prep [7:65104] > > > > I think you should be asking good books? :) I am > currently using Bruces > > Caslows, Routing and Switching, New Cisco Press CCIE book, > and the Cisco > > Press CCIE - Practical Book. > > > > I think the best way to tackle the "big one" is to start a > file yourself, > an > > in it have a chapter for each topic that appears on the blueprint, > > methodically go through each topic and research if from a number of > sources > > (books, white papers, RFC's) etc, Obviously, topics where > you are stronger > > needs less detail. And of course back it all up with hands > on. Even for > the > > written ecam, memory retention, I find is always better > when I have worked > > through a lab or section of a lab. > > > > The idea being that you will cover everything off, and > realise that the > > area's you dont like, you need to put in a little but more > work. At the > end > > of it and, when you get the email saying congrats, you're > ccie is you > > can then sell you file and get it published :) hehehe, then > future ccie > > wannabies will be asking,.what is s good bookm, and you can > recommend your > > own. :) > > > > Good luck studying! > > > > > > Skarphedinsson Arni V. wrote: > > > > > > Can anyone recomend a good book for CCIE Written preperation ? Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=65202&t=65104 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: to the moderator [7:65037]
You forgot to thank a very important contributor to the list. On behalf of us all, I would also like to thank Howard's cat. =) > -Original Message- > From: Robert Edmonds [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 10:28 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: to the moderator [7:65037] > > > Well, I would like to take this opportunity to thank Paul > then. I have > learned a lot just reading the interesting posts here. In > fact, I keep a > document of any particularly good tips for future reference. > I would also > like to thank a couple of the most active folks here, like Larry and > Priscilla for sharing their obvious experience. This free > site helps make > my (and I'm quite sure, other folks') job a lot easier. > > Robert > > ""John Neiberger"" wrote in message > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >just wondering who is the moderator here? > > >yesterday i could send messages ok, now, i can't, can u > tell what you > > >changed? and if so the reasons that made you do so? > > > > Paul, the list owner and operator, was working on a problem with the > > GroupStudy email system most of yesterday. It appears that > it has been > > fixed. > > > > To answer your first question, there are actually several > participants > > that act as moderators but we don't have any control over the actual > > operation of the system. Paul is the owner/operator and is > also who we > > should thank for GroupStudy even being in existence. I mention that > > because he doesn't get nearly the credit he deserves for > the amount of > > work he puts into a FREE site. :-) > > > > Regards, > > John > > One of several possible moderators Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=65201&t=65037 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Cisco Instructor - CCNA Class [7:65742]
The most important thing to remember is that the CCNA is roughly 70% concepts and 30% commands. It's very easy to get wrapped up in commands, but it doesn't do students any good if they've memorized the commands to configure frame relay but they don't know what frame is or when it is used. You may want to post a message on the CCNA list. I believe there are several other Network Academy instructors there who will have some input too. Hal Logan CCAI, CCNDP, CCNP: Voice Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty Computing & Engineering Technology Manatee Community College > -Original Message- > From: Robert Raver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2003 9:22 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Cisco Instructor - CCNA Class [7:65742] > > > Hey, > > I have been given the duty to teach a CCNA class. Have any > of you done this > before? I was wondering what did and didn't work for you? > What tips you > might have. What the best way of approaching this would be. > We will be > using > the Cisco Press book for the class and each student will have > three routers > and a switch. > > Thanks, > Robert Raver Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=65766&t=65742 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: netbios over internet [7:40784]
The biggest obstacle is the fact that most ISP's filter NBT traffic. It works just fine over a VPN connection, as the ISP doesn't see the NBT packets; they see VPN traffic. Basically all you have to do is get around an access list blocking ports 137, 138, and 139. -Original Message- From: Kim Edward B [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Mon 4/8/2002 11:45 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Subject: RE: netbios over internet [7:40784] I don't think it can. As far as I know, it can do IP/IPX/DecNet/AppleTalk/Vines/CLNS. NetBios over TCP/IP will work with GRE but not straight NetBios or SNA. If GRE works with NetBios or SNA, it will be cool. I think that is why we use DLSW with NetBios and SNA connection. Ed -Original Message- From: Jay [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 10:44 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: netbios over internet [7:40784] Is it possible to send nonroutable traffic through a GRE Tunnel? On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 10:12, Engelhard M. Labiro wrote: > How about NetBIOS over TCP/IP (NBT) and encapsulate > it with IPSec. Another idea is using a GRE tunnel to > pass the NetBIOS to the next hop. > > > > I don't think you can, besides bridging on every internet hop. > > > > On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 23:14, cage wrote: > > > how can I make the netbios over Internet except the dlsw+ ? * DISCLAIMER: The information contained in this e-mail may be confidential and is intended solely for the use of the named addressee. Access, copying or re-use of the e-mail or any information contained therein by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient please notify us immediately by returning the e-mail to the originator. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=40835&t=40784 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: ac-path access list [7:40983]
Sounds right to me. If ^ matches the beginning of the AS path and $ matches the end, then ^10$ refers to routes that originated from AS 10 and have nothing after AS 10 in their path. -Original Message- From: Anthony Pace [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wed 4/10/2002 6:01 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Subject: Re: ac-path access list [7:40983] A. will catch any routes which have ever traversed AS-10 B. will catch only routes which have originated in 10 and have just come into your AS from AS-10 (meaning you would be directly connected to AS-10. Does anyone else interperete B differently than this?? Anthony Pace ""Steven A. Ridder"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Is there any difference in these two commands? > > A. ip as-path access-list deny _10_ > > B. ip as-path access-list deny ^10$ > > If I understand corerctly, they both deny AS 10, and only 10. > > -- > > RFC 1149 Compliant. > Get in my head: > http://sar.dynu.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=41158&t=40983 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: IPX EIGRP Metrics [7:41585]
Steve, What IP routing protcol are you using? If you're using an IP routing protocol that only routes based on bandwidth (ie OSPF) you should be able to influence the IPX EIGRP routing decisions by changing the delay on the interface. If you're using EIGRP as your IP routing protcol as well, that doesn't do you much good. From there you have two possible solutions I can think of. One would be to change the bandwidth or delay to get your IPX traffic to do what you want, then use policy routing to force your IP traffic to do what you want. That sounds like the simplest approach. Your other option would be to tune the metrics under IP EIGRP so that they don't take delay into account, then change the delay on the interface however you see fit. I don't know if changing the metric weights in IP EIGRP would affect IPX EIGRP, so I'd shy away from that if at all possible. hth, Hal -Original Message- From: Stephen Barlow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 8:10 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: IPX EIGRP Metrics [7:41585] Is there any way to alter the metrics of IPX EIGRP other than changing the bandwidth on an interface? Specifically, I want to route IPX traffic over a 40Mbs link instead of a 100Mbs temporarily, and I don't want to alter the bandwidth on the interface as it will affect the IP routing. Thank you in advance. Steve Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=41615&t=41585 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: IOS Documentation [7:41577]
My selling point on documentation is that it's like carrying car insurance. Most of the time you don't really need it, but when you do need it you spend a lot less because you have it. Of course, the same people who don't want their network documented probably wouldn't carry automotive insurance if it weren't required by law, so you're back to square one. -Original Message- From: Tom Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 10:26 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: IOS Documentation [7:41577] Tim Champion wrote: > I have recently been asked to document the various IOS images used within > our network to be used as a baseline. Has anyone had experience in putting > together this kind of document? Good question. I hope someone takes the time to answer. Documentation is one of the most important, and most neglected, aspects of the networking profession. Establishing a baseline is a good start. It includes not only traffic statistics but also configurations, cabling, logical and physical topologies, and anything else that might make the job of maintaining and troubleshooting a network an enjoyable challenge instead of the headache it can be without documentation. I have a potential customer who refuses to acknowledge the need for documentation. He's got an AVVID network that "works just fine without having to hire a consultant to draw a bunch of diagrams" as he puts it. The guy who installed it told him it was zero maintenance, and nothing I've said thus far can convince him otherwise. So I'm preparing a slideshow about network documentation and baselining. I'd appreciate any suggestions, horror stories, success stories, etc. My philosophy is: Plan for failure. I don't mean that in a pessimistic way. It's just that, given enough time, all networks fail in one way or another. Some events are disasters, others only an inconvenience that can be worked around and coped with by non-technical users. But in the long run, something serious will happen, It's our job to be prepared for that and to reduce the negative impact as much as possible. How do we convince clients to invest in baselining, contingency plans and the like? Does anyone have a good book on this? other than the usual ones, like the CIT cert exam preps and Semester 8 from the CNAP curriculum? Is there any specific book or chapter or website that gives a template for baselining, network documentation, contingency planning? -- TT Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=41618&t=41577 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: How do you get that? [7:41832]
Steve, You and Scott are now my favoritest people in the whole wide world. I've understood the concept, but I couldn't ask for a more clear and concise explanation. -Original Message- From: Steve Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2002 1:30 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: How do you get that? [7:41832] You can credit Scott Morris for this explanation: Let's go way back to voice sampling days (where our DS0s and T-1 originate) and look at the bandwidth of each voice line. The human voice occupies 3,200 Hz of sound waves. We cover some area on the outside of this and round it up to a 4,000 Hz range. The Nyquist Theorem tells us that to adequately sample and represent any signal, we should sample at twice the frequency rate. That means if the sound waves cycle through 4,000 cycles per second (Hz), then we should sample at twice that, or 8,000 times per second. In addition, each sample is represented on an 8-bit scale. So we have eight bits of information in each of 8,000 times per second. That's where we come up with 64,000 bits per second for a voice channel (64k per DS0). Now, looking at a T-1, we have 24 individual channels (or DS0s). Doing more math, 64,000 times 24 is 1,536,000 or 1,536k as your Cisco 7000 allows. So where does your other router come up with that extra 8,000 bits? Magic? No, that boils down to framing and some interpretation. On a T-1, a frame consists of the information from each of the 24 channels. So each frame (8,000 per second) represents 24 times 8 bits, or 192 bits of information. In addition, there's one synchronization bit in each frame. This gives us 193 bits per frame. While the synchronization bit moves across the line, it doesn't contain usable data. But, when looking at the raw numbers here... 193 bits (each frame) times 8,000 frames per second yields 1,544,000 bits per second. Usable information, however is 24 channels times 8 bits times 8,000 frames per second... Or 1,536,000 bits per second. -Original Message- From: Kelly Cobean [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2002 11:33 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: How do you get that? [7:41832] All, I was wondering if any of you have a good link to a site that explains how the bandwidth is derived for T-1/T-3 circuits. What I'm looking for specifically is how we come to 1.544 Mb/s for a T-1 that is 24x64K channels which = 1536K, and what happens to the other 8K, and the same calculation for a T-3. Descriptions of Robbed-bit signaling, etc., too. Thanks much for your help. Kelly Cobean, CCNP, CCSA, ACSA, MCSE, MCP+I Network Engineer GRC International, Inc., an AT&T company Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=41854&t=41832 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Untagged Frames ?? [7:41853]
Sorry if this sounds dumb, but isn't that effectively what you do when you make a port a member of a static VLAN? -Original Message- From: Anthony Pace [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2002 2:49 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Untagged Frames ?? [7:41853] How can you tell a switch or router to treat untagged frames as any other VLAN other thatn VLAN1 which is the default? Is it a VTP command on the switch? How about routers ? How about 2924 siwtches? Anthony Pace ""Jeffrey Reed"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > One of the things related to native VLAN was VTP updates. I think they go > over the "native" VLAN, so you'll need to make sure its the same for all the > switches in the same VTP domain. > > Jeffrey Reed > Classic Networking, Inc. > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > Lopez, Robert > Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2002 1:10 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: native vlan [7:41837] > > Group, > > What is the significance of deciding what vlan to use for the "native vlan" > when setting up a trunk. Presently, I use "native vlan 1" when setting up > a trunk. Could I use any other vlan that is established on both switches as > the "native vlan"? I'll be searching thru CCO while I wait for a faster > response. :) TIA. > > Robert > > > > > Robert M. Lopez > Network Engineering > CIT - Ann Arbor > Pfizer Global Research & Development > Phone 734-622-3948 Fax 734-622-1690 > > "There are only two ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a > miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle." ...Albert > Einstein Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=41875&t=41853 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: OSPF over ISDN demand circuit [7:42348]
I don't see what that would gain... if floating statics are in use, then there's no reason to run ospf over the interface. Passive interface prevents an OSPF adjacency from ever forming, since the interface can't send out LSA's. Since floating statics are usually frowned upon in in lab scenarios, that may not be an option. According to CCO, only one end of an OSPF circuit needs to have the demand-circuit command. Problems result of one end of the circuit doesn't support the demand-circuit command (IOS older than 11.2). Check out http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/104/dcprob.html for other possibilites (watch the wrap). -Original Message- From: timothy thielen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 9:53 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: OSPF over ISDN demand circuit [7:42348] If one wishes for routing updates to bring up the link, can one not just use the "passive-interface" command on the ISDN interface? If it is a backup link, passive interface will keep routing updates will keep the link from coming up for updates. Then a couple of floating static routes on either end should bring it up if the primary (dynamic)link goes down as long as the administrative distance for the floaters are greater then that of OSPF. --Tim Ruihai An wrote: > > Hi, Group, > > On an ISDN circuit running ospf , if I want to use "ip ospf > demand-circuit" > to keep it from being brought up by ospf update, do I need to > define > 224.0.0.5 as non-interesting traffic in dialer-list? > > I have configured "ip ospf demand-circuit" on one side of the > ISDN, but > routing update to 224.0.0.5 keeps activating the circuit? What > is the > problem? > > Thanks > > Ruihai Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=42445&t=42348 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Networkers in San Diego [7:42402]
I'll be there. Anyone else planning on going to the CCIE prep power session? Hal Logan CCAI, CCDP, CCNP+Voice Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty Computing & Engineering Technology Manatee Community College -Original Message- From: Tom Lisa [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 2:02 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Networkers in San Diego [7:42402] Yes. Prof. Tom Lisa, CCAI Community College of Southern Nevada Cisco ATC/Regional Networking Academy "Steven A. Ridder" wrote: > Is anyone attending Networkers in San Diego this year? Just curious. > > -- > RFC 1149 Compliant > > Get in my head: > http://sar.dynu.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=42457&t=42402 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Networkers in San Diego [7:42402]
I'm trying to take the Monday one too. I don't know if I'll be able to though, because there are pseudo-mandatory networking academy events going on monday. Two of our other instructors are going though, so I'm going to try and get them to take one for the team while I do the CCIE power session. There's a second power session on friday, but it looks like I'm going to have to leave Thursday night. As for whether or not they're helpful, I've never been to networkers before. My only source of feedback from networkers is one of our instructors went last year, but he didn't do any of the power sessions. For the breakout sessions I'm going to try and take at least one that's on something I'm not even remotely knowledgeable of (probably MPLS) and I'll attend others on topics I'm weak on that are more likely to show up on the lab, as my lab date is in july. For those who went last year, did they have the CCIE power session then, and would you recommend it? Hal -Original Message- From: Steven A. Ridder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 4:43 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Networkers in San Diego [7:42402] Are the CCIE power sessions helpful? ""Logan, Harold"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > I'll be there. Anyone else planning on going to the CCIE prep power session? > > Hal Logan CCAI, CCDP, CCNP+Voice > Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty > Computing & Engineering Technology > Manatee Community College > > > -Original Message- > From: Tom Lisa [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 2:02 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Networkers in San Diego [7:42402] > > > Yes. > > Prof. Tom Lisa, CCAI > Community College of Southern Nevada > Cisco ATC/Regional Networking Academy > > > "Steven A. Ridder" wrote: > > > Is anyone attending Networkers in San Diego this year? Just curious. > > > > -- > > RFC 1149 Compliant > > > > Get in my head: > > http://sar.dynu.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=42470&t=42402 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Is IGRP actually supported by other vendors? [7:43994]
You're right about IGRP still being listed on the CCNA objectives. While I've sometimes found it frustrating to teach an outdated protocol, IGRP is useful as a teaching tool. With IGRP you can easily demonstrate the concept of composite metrics, poison reverse, holddown timers, split horizon, and unequal-cost load balancing, but you don't have multicast updates, neighbor relationships, incremental updates, and VLSM's adding to the confusion. If EIGRP replaces IGRP on the CCNA, then hopefully the certification team will draw a clear line indicating which features of eigrp will be tested and which ones won't. The way things are right now, IGRP makes for a smooth transition from the CCNA to the CCNP Routing exam. Someone who understands IGRP doesn't need to reinvent the wheel to learn EIGRP, and once one has supernetting and neighbor relationships in his or her belt, they can deal with OSPF area types and LSA's and the like. Hal Logan CCAI, CCDP, CCNP:Voice Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty Computing & Engineering Technology Manatee Community College -Original Message- From: Priscilla Oppenheimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 1:27 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Is IGRP actually supported by other vendors? [7:43994] Well, it occurs to me that IGRP would be easy to implement even without Cisco's permission. ;-) It's a simple protocol, for one thing. Also, the Rutgers paper that describes IGRP has been out for years. Cisco never objected to it. EIGRP would not be easy to implement without Cisco's blessings, developer support, licensed code, etc. We have probably all tried to figure out some detail of EIGRP or other and run into a brick wall. (For example, what does an router EIGRP really do with the MTU that is passed around in Updates? ;-) On a related tangent, will they remove IGRP from CCNA? I'm teaching a custom CCNA class next month, using my own materials. I find it annoying that I have to sort of downgrade my materials to teach IGRP theory and hands-on instead of the EIGRP I would prefer to teach and is already in my materials. But I think I'm right that CCNA expects IGRP and not EIGRP? Thx Priscilla At 04:02 AM 5/13/02, nrf wrote: >In-line > wrote in message >[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > Nokia might support it, but I have been (fairly reliably) told that Cisco > > will *not* be supporting IGRP as of one of the newest IOS releases. I > > can't find the announcement on CCO (if there is one), so take with a grain > > of salt, but a Cisco instructor was quite adamant about this last week. > >That makes sense, considering it's literally been years since I've actually >seen a bonafide production network running IGRP. So it makes sense that >Cisco is finally ditching this dead wood. > >But I'm not asking this question because I'm champing at the bit to install >a mixed Cisco/Nokia IGRP network. No, I'm asking because if it's true that >Nokia really does support IGRP, then that begs the question - what other >supposedly Cisco-proprietary technologies are like this too? I'm not >talking about situations like what Howard stated where Cisco actually has an >agreement to provide its technology to other vendors (somehow I doubt that >Cisco and Nokia have such an agreement), but I'm talking about full-blown >vendor compatibility between some other vendor and Cisco. For example, does >anybody know of another vendor that supports, say, EIGRP? Or CDP? Now you >might say that it would be impossible for another vendor to support these >technologies, but, hey, Nokia apparently somehow managed to support IGRP, so >why exactly couldn't somebody else support, say, EIGRP? > > > > > JMcL > > - Forwarded by Jenny Mcleod/NSO/CSDA on 13/05/2002 04:44 pm - > > > > > > "nrf" > > Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > 13/05/2002 01:42 pm > > Please respond to "nrf" > > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > cc: > > Subject:Is IGRP actually supported by other vendors? > > [7:43994] > > Is this part of a business decision process?: > > > > > > Just found this while surfing around. > > > > "As a network device, the Nokia IP330 supports a comprehensive suite of > > IP-routing functions and protocols, including RIPv1/RIPv2, IGRP, OSPF and > > BGP4 for unicast traffic..." > > http://www.nokia.com/securitysolutions/platforms/330.html > > > > Every piece of literature I've ever read has stated without fail that IGRP > > is proprietary to Cisco. Yet here's Nokia brazenly claiming that they in > > fact support IGRP. What's up with that? Unfortunately I don't have an > > Ipso > > box lying around that I can actually experiment with. Can anyone confirm > > whether this is true and whether it provides complete interoperability > > with > > Cisco? Priscilla Oppenheimer http://www.priscilla.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44101&t=43994 ---
RE: Is IGRP actually supported by other vendors? [7:43994]
Actually, I've seen newer materials that have stopped using the word "hybrid" altogether and instead refer to EIGRP as an "Enhanced Distance Vector" or a "Modified Distance Vector" protocol. An instructor I met a few months ago introduced me to a phrase that I've since found very useful: "The truth at this level". He used this phrase when trying to answer a question one of his CCNA students asked him, without getting too complicated. In an effort to keep things simple, Lammle makes several statements in his CCNA books that aren't true 100% of the time, but an aspiring networker studying for the CCNA doesn't need to get beyond a certain level of detail, lest they get overwhelmed. Rick would do well to put that phrase at the beginning of anything Lammle writes in a CCNA book. At the CCNA level, it's fairly safe to say that EIGRP has features in common with distance vector protocols and link state protocols. At the CCNP level, I would expect an aspiring networker to learn what features EIGRP has in common with distance vector protocols, and I would expect him or her to note that those features, such as established adjacencies, VLSM support, and incremental updates are simply additional features, not the core of the routing process. Unless of course you simply want to stay at the CCNA level, in which case I'd say that you can call EIGRP a hybrid protocol all day long if that floats your boat. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Peter van Oene Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 3:02 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Is IGRP actually supported by other vendors? [7:43994] Couple thoughts here Rick. First off, always consider that there may be (and usually are) flaws in secondary source material and thus don't believe everything you read.Beyond that, I have a couple questions related to the matter. Primarily, what exactly is a hybrid routing protocol? Hybrid is a pretty ambiguous term if you ask me. Additionally, what elements of link state routing are evident in the EIGRP implementation? Simply because a protocol happens to build adjacencies via hello packets does not categorize it as a link state protocol. I'd fully concur with Priscilla's description of the details and Howard B also has written similar on this topic in his Scalable Link State Routing series on www.certificationzone.com. At 06:42 PM 5/13/2002 -0400, Rick wrote: >Priscilla, >I hate to differ with you on this Hybrid or not but the source says >it is considered a Hybrid routing Protocol. check the link for yourself >http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/cisintwk/ito_doc/en_igrp.htm > >I myself am not a fan Lammle, but on this one he is right and you are wrong >and YES I said you are wrong! EIGRP is as much Link-State as it is Distance >Vector. >Rick > >""Priscilla Oppenheimer"" wrote in message >[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > At 04:13 PM 5/13/02, Mike Mandulak wrote: > > >Lammle refers to EIGRP as being a Hybrid of distance-vector and link >state. > > > > That's wrong. EIGRP is not link-state in any way. EIGRP calculates a flat > > routing table that lists networks, distance, and next hop (distance > > vectors). If the list contains multiple entries for a destination (because > > there are multiple ways to reach the destination), the entries are sorted > > by metric and the one with the lowest metric is selected. This is very > > different than how a link-state protocol functions. > > > > A link-state routing protocol creates a mathematical graph that depicts >he > > network. A link-state protocol implements a sophisticated process, called > > the Dijkstra algorithm, to determine the shortest path to all points in >the > > graph when the nodes and links in the graph are known. Link-state has a > > specific meaning to computer scientists. You'll find a lot of good stuff > > about it if you search with Google. A lot of it is not related to routing > > protocols. > > > > EIGRP does have some features that make it different from other > > distance-vector protocols. Although EIGRP still sends vectors with >distance > > information, the updates are non-periodic, partial, and bounded. > > Non-periodic means that updates are sent only when a metric changes rather > > than at regular intervals. Partial means that updates include only routes > > that have changed, not every entry in the routing table. Bounded means >that > > updates are sent only to affected routers. These behaviors mean that EIGRP > > uses very little bandwidth. > > > > EIGRP also determines a feasible successor, which other distance-vector > > protocols don't do. Its complex metric is also a feature not found in many > > other distance-vector algorithms, (except IGRP of course). > > > > Please do not send messages to me directly, especially not to quote Lammle > > CCNA fluff. > > > > Priscilla > > > > >He only gives a brief mention of EIGRP and says to refer to the CCNP >study > > >gu
RE: Is IGRP actually supported by other vendors? [7:43994]
Howard, thanks for your input. Comments inline... Hal > -Original Message- > From: Howard C. Berkowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 7:22 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Is IGRP actually supported by other vendors? [7:43994] > > > At 4:25 PM -0400 5/13/02, Logan, Harold wrote: > >You're right about IGRP still being listed on the CCNA > objectives. While > >I've sometimes found it frustrating to teach an outdated > protocol, IGRP is > >useful as a teaching tool. With IGRP you can easily > demonstrate the concept > >of composite metrics, poison reverse, holddown timers, split > horizon, and > >unequal-cost load balancing, but you don't have multicast > updates, neighbor > >relationships, incremental updates, and VLSM's adding to the > confusion. > > You make some interesting instructional points that I want to think > about. Let me make some observations. > > No modern routing protocol uses composite metrics, in the sense that > a numerical value is computed from several factors. I don't know if > you'd consider route preference (e.g., OSPF intraarea over interarea > over external) to be composite; I don't. >From this statement I'm inferring that you don't consider EIGRP to be a modern protocol? If so, I would concede that it's not as scalable as OSPF or IS-IS. But it's still deployed in networks, and anyone going through cisco's certification program has to learn it. Or am I missing something on EIGRP's calculation of a metric based on bandwidth and delay? At any rate, I haven't had enough caffeine today to wrestle with intraarea, interarea, and external routes as part of a composite metric. I suppose if someone really wanted to they could try to argue that External Type 1 routes qualify as a composite metric, but I think even that's pushing it. > Poison reverse, split horizon and holddown are explained decently in > the very readable RIP RFC. Agreed. Whenever possible I like to demonstrate protocols in action, rather than tell a student to take my word for it, or even take an RFC's word for it. Besides, I almost have to threaten physical violence before I can get a student to read an RFC. (Considering that I work for a state-funded community college, physical threats are usually frowned upon) RIP does work nicely along those lines; if a student does some debugging and sees an advertisement go out with a hop count of 16, usually a connection gets made to the idea of advertising a network as unreachable, and viola. Poison Reverse is now associated with a network the student has set up, and seen in action, rather than a paragraph from a textbook or an RFC. The benefit of demonstrating the same concepts again using IGRP is simple reinforcement. > Unequal cost load balancing is increasingly deprecated; there are > better ways to do traffic engineering. That's why I don't spend a lot of time covering it. I do however have an obligation to at least pay lip service to it, enough to ensure that students associate the variance command with UCLB. When Cisco takes it off the cert exams, I'll stop teaching it. > > > >If EIGRP replaces IGRP on the CCNA, then hopefully the > certification team > >will draw a clear line indicating which features of eigrp > will be tested and > >which ones won't. The way things are right now, IGRP makes > for a smooth > >transition from the CCNA to the CCNP Routing exam. Someone > who understands > >IGRP doesn't need to reinvent the wheel to learn EIGRP, > > I'd argue that other than some similarities in commands and metrics, > IGRP and EIGRP are completely different protocols. This is conjecture on my part, as I won't teach my first CCNP class until January... but it seems to me that when put in a class where they have to learn the basics of EIGRP, OSPF, and BGP, students are going to focus first and foremost on the configuration commands. Considering that the only difference between the basic configuration process for igrp and for ip eigrp is the addition of the mask option after the network command (along with the addition of a vowel) I believe that will free up some CPU cycles so that students can focus on DUAL, multiple topology tables, summary addresses, feasible successors, and other new concepts. > There is a trivial case of neighbor relationships in RIP, as a router > with a RIP-enabled interface will suppress outgoing updates until it > hears a RIP query from a router on the medium. That is a form of > neighbor discovery. > > It is different from using a hello subprotocol to know if a neighbor > is still alive. See, I call that a useful comparison. When I field questions, I'd say at
RE: Passed CCIE written [7:44441]
>From the content of your posts I had always figured that you had passed the written and were working on the lab, congrats. Have you set a date yet? Hal > -Original Message- > From: Steven A. Ridder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Saturday, May 18, 2002 11:15 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Passed CCIE written [7:1] > > > I passed CCIE written. In my opinion, it's an old, useless test, and > defintily needs updating. CVoice or CCDP is a tougher test. > > -- > > RFC 1149 Compliant. > Get in my head: > http://sar.dynu.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44527&t=1 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Errata for Coriolis books? [7:44638]
Most of the Sybex books I've read have been too "dummied down" to be of any use by themselves, but Todd Lammle's writing style is easy enough to understand that you can take a technology you know nothing about, read a couple pages, then have a handle on the basics of it. From there it's easier (for me at least) to cross reference with a more detailed book without getting mired down in the jargon. The ciscopress books worked nicely for me along those lines, as the old ciscopress ccnp books read like stereo instructions. For the IGP's on the routing exam, you may want to check out Solie's CCIE Practical Studies book. It goes into more detail than you need to for the NP exams, but everything is demonstrated in lab walk-thru exercises that you can set up with a few routers. I haven't checked out the ciscopress books for any of the NP exams (I took mostly the older versions) but you may want to pick that up, as Solie's book doesn't cover BGP. > -Original Message- > From: Robert Kulagowski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 1:13 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Errata for Coriolis books? [7:44638] > > > I was hoping that wasn't going to be the case (in that they > apparently never > did anything with the feedback). > > Does anyone have recommendations for a publisher that 1) Has > good reading > material for CCNP and 2) Actually maintains an errata page that > incorporates feedback? > > As far as #2, I've had good results with Sybex, at least on the CCNA > material. The support person answered emails quickly, and a > few days later > I would see that the errata page had been updated. One thing that the > support person told me was that errata had to be checked with > the authors, > so this might also factor in. > > I see from the archive that Priscilla O. is still an active > contributor; do > any other authors of CCXX material frequent this or other lists? > > Thanks. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44647&t=44638 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Errata for Coriolis books? [7:44638]
One thing to add there, the most recent revision of the Networking Academy curriculum has animations that would have saved me hours and hours of headaches if I'd had them when I was first learning OSPF, and it also presents BGP in an understandable manner. > -Original Message- > From: s vermill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 1:30 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Errata for Coriolis books? [7:44638] > > > I'm a big fan of most Cisco Press books. However, they totally ignore > feedback and I know of times where folks have pointed out > clear errata only > to see the book go through several more printings with the > same errrors. I > read both CCNP libraries and found all but one of the books > in them to be > anywhere from satisfactory to great. Stay away from the > routing book in the > Cert Library (as opposed to the Prep Library) - at least > until you know the > material well enough to spot where the author or the editors > didn't know the > fundamentals of some of the material (lots of LSAs going the wrong > direction, etc). > > In any case, I recommend one or both libraries. They can be found > reasonably priced at bookpool and several others I have seen > metioned here. > > Robert Kulagowski wrote: > > > > I was hoping that wasn't going to be the case (in that they > > apparently never did anything with the feedback). > > > > Does anyone have recommendations for a publisher that 1) Has > > good reading material for CCNP and 2) Actually maintains an > > errata page that incorporates feedback? > > > > As far as #2, I've had good results with Sybex, at least on the > > CCNA material. The support person answered emails quickly, and > > a few days later I would see that the errata page had been > > updated. One thing that the support person told me was that > > errata had to be checked with the authors, so this might also > > factor in. > > > > I see from the archive that Priscilla O. is still an active > > contributor; do any other authors of CCXX material frequent > > this or other lists? > > > > Thanks. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44648&t=44638 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: CCNA level IPX question, proper phrasing [7:45138]
In my opinion that question is fair game. the optional MAC address that can be specified is used for interface that have no bia, such as serial and loopback interfaces. By default they "borrow" the MAC from a LAN interface, but you may want to specify your own in order to keep documentation and troubleshooting simple. For example, if I enable ipx on router #1 using the command 'ipx routing 1.1.1' then all I need to do to ping a serial interface on router 1 that's on network 1a is ping ipx 1a.1.1.1, which is a lot easier than having to look up and type out a mac address. I think that's a great question, and it's certainly a CCNA-level question. Hal Logan CCAI, CCDP, CCNP+Voice Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty Computing & Engineering Technology Manatee Community College > -Original Message- > From: Mike Sweeney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, May 27, 2002 9:39 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: CCNA level IPX question, proper phrasing [7:45138] > > > I have a IPX question in my CCNA practice test beta and I've > had some mixed > feedback on it. The questions asks what is the command to > enable IPX routing > on a router and gives a MAC address as part of the question. > The question is > a *fill in the blank* type. The answer I have is: > > ipx routing > > Is making the MAC a requirement of the answer a *fair* use of > the command? I > thought so even though IPX routing will automaticaly assign the node > address. I felt inclusion of the MAC into the question was a > clue that it > needed to specified. Is this too much to ask of a budding CCNA? > > PS- for those who would want to look at the entire beta, > it's 60 questions > at this point and a free download.. as long as you use the > feedback form to > give me yes, no, it sucks etc..etc.. :) I have managed to > get some good > feedback so far and will always take more. > > www.packetattack.com/tutorials.html > > Thanks > > MikeS Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=45245&t=45138 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: CCDP, What book? [7:45109]
That book, along with some reading up on SNA on CCO, worked fine for me. Good luck, Hal > -Original Message- > From: Kris Keen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, May 27, 2002 12:09 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: CCDP, What book? [7:45109] > > > I purchased the Top Down book my Priscilla! > > Lets see how I go at the exam in 2 weeks! > Thanks Andy! Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=45252&t=45109 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bandwidth Domain (WAS RE: written) [7:45254]
Here's the short answer for a bandwidth domain: It's a collision domain for a non CSMACD network. It kinda makes sense, you can't very well have a tokenring collision domain can you? hth, Hal > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Sunday, May 26, 2002 9:35 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: written [7:45056] > > > I agree with your statement about poorly worded questions. > However, this > is just an excuse for a poorly written test! > > Oh just for the record, ever hear of a bandwidth domain? If you have > please let me know about it because I can't find it anywhere. > > I didn't say that only CCSE<>knowledge of security! (Man if > you had any > clue you would have said > CSS1<> knowledge of security and I didn't say that either! > But why not > say CCNP/IP<> knowledge of Routing just to be consistant!) > What I implied > was that those 3 tests in combination would give at least a > suggestion > that I do know security enough to not get a 0% on an easier test > especially with the same vendor! Additionally, what I said > before is that > the CCSE was a test where I had to memorize answers in order > to pass the > test pure and simple vs Most of Cisco's tests where what I > read in a book > is used the same day on the job. If you know the theory then > you know it. > It will be the same in RSA or a RFC or sometimes even > Microsoft or other > publications. > > Oh can I make this clearer? If I read Doyle, Halabi, > Pricilla, Howard or > Moy, I can not only apply their knowledge to any vendor > network, but I can > pass Cisco tests based on their books and become more educated in the > process. (I am still making money just from Top-Down) If I > don't know what > these 5 authors are talking about then I need to > reread them for I will fail to know networking in more than one > environment. I really didn't have this experience with > Checkpoint although > RFC 2401-2410 did help a bit. With Checkpoint I was pretty > much on my own > and no matter how many times I did the labs and implemented > solutions for > customers, I still didn't help me on the test. 4 routers, Halabi and > Caslow, and a day in an ISP was all I needed to increase from > a 10% to a > 100% on the BGP section of the BSCN (of yeah about 10 lattes > at least). > That is how tests should be. > > Reread what I said about the CCSE again... The implication is more > towards the CSS1 and CCIE Sec wri. I just aced the first RSA > test and > Microsoft design Sec test and what helped me out for them? > Grad School, > CSS1, CCSE, CISSP, work, RFC 2401-2410, RSA Press, white > papers,Maeda. If > Cisco can help me get a better score on a non-Cisco test then > it should > help me get a better score on a Cisco test! Got the point? > > Perhaps what you said about my history situation is correct. If my > customer have pre 12.0 I just tell them to upgrade or I will > not work for > them. So far it has worked every time. The same goes for > PIXs. If they > are using 5.2 or the 520 I tell them to get 6.1 and upgrade > to the 525 and > po's are signed. Just force the issue with them or walk > away. It works > well for me :-) It makes your company more money too. > > I know Foundry is not the only solution. We have here, > Extreme, Juniper, > NEC, Hitachi, Packeteer, BigIP, among other vendors. I used Foundry > because of the straight forwardness of the vendor, quality, > and price but > I evaluated the other vendors as well. > > Theo > > > > > > > > "Kevin Cullimore" > Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 05/27/2002 08:44 AM > Please respond to "Kevin Cullimore" > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > cc: > Subject:Re: written [7:45056] > > > Dealing with poorly worded questions can sometimes serve as > good practice > for interpreting the inherent incoherence & unrealism > characterizing many > customer demands and concerns in real time. > > The relevance of the history questions underscores the > distinctiveness of > your situation. You are indeed fortunate to not have to contend with > legacy > code, but many of us lack the financial independence to > adhere to your > high > standards, so we're faced with situations where we need to > make sure that > the intermediate systems on the far end running code from > 1999 can support > the relatively new functionality we were hoping to implement > on devices > found at the near end. > > Two side notes: Foundry is not the only alternative, and I can verify > firsthand that CCSE<>knowledge of security (although I admit > that those > exams contained more questions concerning rfc-based security > standards > than > any other exams I've taken). > > > - Original Message - > From: > To: > Sent: 26 May 2002 4:44 am > Subject: Re: written [7:45056] > > > > Yeah but I can sympathize with you man because several
RE: CCNA level IPX question, proper phrasing [7:45138]
I tried to install the practice test, but no dice so far. I don't suppose it's win2k friendly? In the meantime, would you mind sharing with us the wording of the question? I think it's fair to require someone to know the significance of the optional mac address after the IPX routing command, but depending on how you worded the question (and how the explanation of the correct answer is worded) you may be getting ready to frustrate the h3ll out of anyone who takes it. > -Original Message- > From: Mike Sweeney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 11:35 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: CCNA level IPX question, proper phrasing [7:45138] > > > So far I'm running about 3 to 1 in favor of the question as > it is. Both > sides have made interesting arguments in their favor. But I'm > a bit biased :) > > Logan, I had not thought of the IPX pinging, good call on that. > > MikeS Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=45269&t=45138 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Networkers San Diego [7:45885]
I'll be at the CCIE Power Session on Monday. It better be worth it... I just got done paying for my power session, air fare to san diego, and registration fee for my lab in july. I'm at the point where my credit cards cringe every time I reach for my wallet. Anyone else doing the IE power session? Hal > -Original Message- > From: Ken Diliberto [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 8:24 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Networkers San Diego [7:45885] > > > I am. Should be interesting. If there's already a meeting > place for those > of us attending, I'd like to know so I can be there, too. > > Ken > > >>> "Oleg Oz" 06/05/02 03:44PM >>> > I think I saw a thread on this a few weeks ago but can no > longer find it.. > Is anyone going to networkers in San Diego.. Taking power sessions? > > Oleg. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=45939&t=45885 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Networkers San Diego [7:45885]
So in order to identify you, we just need to wait for someone at the power session to ask if the network in the lab is RFC 1149 compliant? > -Original Message- > From: Steven A. Ridder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 9:01 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Networkers San Diego [7:45885] > > > I'll be at the power session on Mon. > > -- > > RFC 1149 Compliant. > > > > ""Moffett, Ryan"" wrote in message > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > I am doing the IE power session on Friday > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Logan, Harold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 10:50 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: Networkers San Diego [7:45885] > > > > > > I'll be at the CCIE Power Session on Monday. It better be > worth it... I > just > > got done paying for my power session, air fare to san diego, and > > registration fee for my lab in july. I'm at the point where > my credit > cards > > cringe every time I reach for my wallet. > > > > Anyone else doing the IE power session? > > > > Hal > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Ken Diliberto [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 8:24 PM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Re: Networkers San Diego [7:45885] > > > > > > > > > I am. Should be interesting. If there's already a meeting > > > place for those > > > of us attending, I'd like to know so I can be there, too. > > > > > > Ken > > > > > > >>> "Oleg Oz" 06/05/02 03:44PM >>> > > > I think I saw a thread on this a few weeks ago but can no > > > longer find it.. > > > Is anyone going to networkers in San Diego.. Taking power > sessions? > > > > > > Oleg. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=46023&t=45885 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: IP helper address and subnet broadcast [7:25485]
The few times I've needed a packet manipulator, SnifferPro has worked fine for me. The idea I was shooting for (please keep in mind that yesterday I was working on 3 hours of sleep and no caffeine) was to put together a layer 3 broadcast with a layer 2 unicast address, specifically the destination MAC of the router's ethernet interface. That, combined with some packet debugging or accounting on the far router, could tell you if the router forwards traffic to the ip helper address because the layer 2 destination addy is all F's, or if it forwards to the ip helper addres because the layer 3 destination address is the subnet's broadcast addy. I suppose if I'm that curious I should get off my arse and set up such a scenario here, but I let someone else label the cables in my pod, and I'm still working on fixing it... right now the classroom where we keep the routers has v.35 and cat5 cables strewn all over the place. Argh. Hal Logan Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty Computing and Engineering Technology Manatee Community College > -Original Message- > From: R. Benjamin Kessler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 5:18 PM > To: Logan, Harold; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: IP helper address and subnet broadcast [7:25485] > > > Depends on what you're trying to do...the utility I used here is just > "nmap" - see www.insecure.org (note: this is a bit of a > "hacking" tool, so > use with caution). > > This is basically a port scanning tool, you can specify a > remote subnet to > scan but you give it the range of addresses to probe, I don't > see why you > couldn't probe a remote host that just happened to have the > same address as > the subnet broadcast somewhere. > > I guess by definition, if you've got a default gateway > configured and are > sending traffic to a remote subnet you'll have the local router's MAC > address as the destination. > > If you're looking to do something a bit more elaborate you > can try to use a > Sniffer to manufacture a string of packets but it is probably > more trouble > than it's worth. I'm sure that there are plenty of hacker > tools that will > do this but you'll probably need to go lurking on some > different lists to > find them... > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > Logan, Harold > Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 2:32 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: IP helper address and subnet broadcast [7:25485] > > > Interesting... By any chance do you have a packet manipulator > available? > For added fun you could put together a frame with a destination IP of > the subnet's broadcast addy, and a destination MAC of the routers MAC > address... > > > > -Original Message- > > From: R. Benjamin Kessler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 2:03 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: IP helper address and subnet broadcast [7:25485] > > > > > > I setup a remote unix box running nmap and had it send > > packets to the subnet > > broadcast address (in my case 192.168.72.255). I configured > > my router with > > an ip helper command (sending to a single host). I > executed the nmap > > command with and without IP directed broadcast configured on > > the router > > interface and didn't see any difference. > > > > Running a sniffer-like device on the target (of the ip helper > > command) I was > > able to verify the receipt of the packets sent via nmap. > > > > Given a network similar to the following: > > > > +---++---+ > > -| rtr a || rtr b |- > > e0 +---+ e1 e1 +---+ e0 > > > > My understanding of directed-broadcast is that if a packet > > sourced from rtr > > a's e0 network is sent to the broadcast address of rtr b's > > e0; rtr b will > > forward it if directed-broadcast is enabled and drop if not. > > > > IP helper impacts packets heading out (from the router) to > > the interface in > > question not packets inbound. > > > > To take this discussion a step further, the IP helper > > function processes > > packets sent to the MAC-layer broadcast address for the > > specified protocols. > > A packet sent to the local IP broadcast address (10.10.255.255 in > > Priscilla's example) will have the same MAC-layer destination > > address as a > > packet sent to 255.255.255.255. > > > > Comments, questions? Anyone think my logi
RE: CCDP NOw ^-^ [7:25654]
I passed the CID exam the first time I took it, but I passed with exactly the passing score (talk about close!) If you're weak on SNA (which I am) then you may want to just snoop around cisco.com a little. A search on SNA will turn up some decent reading material, and that's all I used to sit for the exam. Good luck, Hal Logan Network Specialist / Adjunct Faculty Computing and Engineering Technology Manatee Community College > -Original Message- > From: tom baartman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 10:43 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: CCDP NOw ^-^ [7:25654] > > > Very good, I didn't made it :-( > My score was 748, I passed all my CCNP exam without any > problems, seems to > me that I missing something in my study materials (I've got > the CID book > from ciscopress), any suggestions for reading / links ? > > Tom Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=26122&t=25654 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Possible to Filter on Destination MAC-Address on a [7:57321]
You'll have to pardon a moment of nostalgia, but the first question I ever asked on groupstudy was about applying a MAC filter to a router. (sniff sniff) To apply a MAC ACL to an interface, you have to set it up to bridge, and since you're routing you need to run IRB. Not that it was meant for such a purpose, but I've had much better results using CAR on a router to filter by MAC address rather than applying an access list. It's much simpler to just use the rate-limit command, imo. It sounds like the router is behaving normally for a router that has multicast members located on an interface. If the switches are causing a broadcast storm, that's a separate issue that should be addressed; the default behavior of most switches is to flood multicasts out all ports. To control that you need to enable either CGMP or IGMP snooping on the appropriate switch ports. hth, Hal > -Original Message- > From: Priscilla Oppenheimer [mailto:nobody@;groupstudy.com] > Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 2:59 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Possible to Filter on Destination MAC-Address on a > [7:57312] > > > Bucher Lars wrote: > > > > I'm trying to configure an input-access-list on 7204 Routers > > (IOS 12.2(10)), > > which should filter on the destination (!) MAC-address but > > can't get it > > work. Is this even possible? > > > > The router should ignore all traffic with a destination-MAC > > (multicast) of > > 0100.5e7c.0006 and accept all other traffic. In my setup, this > > address is > > used with Firewalls in a Stonebeat cluster. > > > > Without filter my routers, by mistake, listen to this traffic, > > replicate it > > and send it out again which causes multicast-storms. > > Wouldn't it be better to figure out why the router is doing > this? Normally, > a router doesn't replicate multicast traffic and send it out > again. Why is > it doing this? Can you send us your config?? > > Priscilla > > > > > I've read that this is quite a common behaviour observed with > > Cisco-Routers > > that run HSRP. By mistake some Routers (depending on what?) > > sometimes listen > > to all Layer2 Multicast-Traffic instead to just the > > HSRP-Multicasts. > > > > Unfortunately, I can't configure any filters on the switch, > > which led me to > > the idea to apply a filter on the routers. > > > > It's no problem to configure an extended MAC Access-list > > (access-list > > ). But I struggle with applying it to the interface. > > The 'bridge-group input-address-list ' just allows > > standard MAC > > Access-Lists, which would filter the source-address only. > > > > So I tried the follwoing approach (CAR): > > > > access-list 1100 permit .. .. > > 0100.5e7c.0006 > > .. > > access-list 101 permit ip any any > > > > interface fastethernet0/0 > > rate-limit input access-group 1100 1 10 10 > > conform-action > > drop exceed-action drop > > rate-limit input access-group 101 1 10 10 > > conform-action > > transmit exceed-action transmit > > > > In the lab the router accepted the commands, but now it blocks > > all traffic > > instead just the specified destination mac-address. > > > > Any suggestions? Thanks in advance. > > > > Lars Bucher Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=57321&t=57321 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
