Anybody recommend a good web reference for the 350-001 test? I've read
multiple manuals and taken a number of the Boson practice tests, but I still
feel a little under-prepared. Any recommendations would be appreciated
(especially from someone who has passed the exam).
jh
Message Posted at:
http
In my humble opinion, cef should not interfere with any of your qos commands
(if anything it helps). As a matter of fact CEF is required when using
certain types of class/policy maps. It sounds to me like custom queuing
would better suit your needs. You probably already know this but custom
que
I've encountered this issue in our production environment with policy-maps.
Here's the answer Cisco's TAC gave me. Since the msfc interfaces are
software based, the MLS engine will bypass the route processor on most of
your layer 3 packets. This prevents the shaping/policing policy from being
appli
I highly recommend Bruce Caslow's "Bridges, Routers & Switches for CCIEs".
This book is the best I've seen. I've also heard good things about "Internet
Routing Architectures" and "Routing TCP/IP" by Jeff Doyle. Hope this helps
and GOOD LUCK on your studies.
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstud
Does anyone know which version of IEEE STP bridge-groups use? Switches use
the PVST+ (one spanning tree per vlan). However, I can't determine if router
bridge-groups use PVST+ or the IEEE standard CST (one spanning tree instance
for all vlans). Here's my delimna: I've got a 4006 (Sup II) with a Lay
i don't see any obvious problems with your configuration. I can, however,
offer a couple of troubleshooting tips. I would start by checking out the
access list ("show access-list") to make sure you have packets that qualify.
Second (and this is where I think your problem is), I would lose the
"matc
forgot to add one thing you probably already know this but if you
decide to use LLQ for a PPP serial connection (like a t1 or frac t1) you
will want to implement LFI (link fragmentation and interleave). this means
that your config will be implemented on a "multilink1" interface rather than
You've got a few options. The most basic (and most limited) is using IP RTP
Priority. The will prioritize all RTP traffic on the applied interface. The
best solution (IMHO) is to use LLQ. Low Latency Queueing can be thought of
as CB-WFQ with the added benefit of a priority queue. This is probably w
239.0.0.0 thru 239.255.255.255 make up the multicast limited scope
(224.0.0.1-238.255.255.255 are classified as globally scoped meaning that
these are taken up by various protocols/applications). As far as I know,
there is no CIDR/subnet mask notation for addresses in the Class D space.
You can ass
9 matches
Mail list logo
