Hi all ,who can provide me with the old INE workbook ? 
I will apprecicate it really .Cheers from Azerbaijan
↧
CCNP workbook
↧
Advertising IPv6 Prefixes/Routes Over IPv4 EBGP Peers
Hi all,
I was solving FS3 and I've found problem with EBGP peering IPv6 over IPv4 (R1 to R4).
After research I've found this article:
https://supportforums.cisco.com/document/84261/advertising-ipv6-prefixesroutes-over-ipv4-ebgp-peers
I don't understand how "ebgp-multihop" resolves issue with peering and why this is needed?
↧
↧
unified MPLS issues with next-hop-self
Has any one tried to Lab unified MPLS? For my ios the next-hop-self neighbor command doesnt seem to work!
I have to use a route-map to manually change the next-hop as well as send a label.
Im using ios Cisco IOS Software, 7200 Software (C7200-ADVIPSERVICESK9-M), Version 15.0(1)M, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc2) in GNS3. Is this a bug of some sort ? the commands are taken but the do have any effect even when a do a hard clear of the BGP sessions!
↧
Eigrp-DMVPN clarification_Full scale lab 1
Hi Guys,
during the ticket 7.3 regarding DMVPN optimization by configuring the stub and connected Eigrp feature on both the spokes (R16-R17) we achieve the task goal to avoid the case where the spokes are queried but at the same time, since the two routers announce only connected, summary and redistributed, the servers behind them cannot receive each other subnet.
The task resolve this problem by configuring an identic summary towards each internal server (172.0.0.0 255.0.0.0).
I was trying to configure instead a summary towards the hub from the tunnel af-interface of the spokes related to the internal server network.
So for example:
From R16 i configured a summary 172.23.0.0/16 towards the hub and from R17 i did another summary 172.25.0.0/16 towards the hub.
After this step i thought, since the summary keyword was specified on both the spokes, that the two summaries would be leaked beyond each spoke to the internal server. Instead my surprise was to see that nothing passed.
Maybe i'm missing something stupid here?
↧
BGP Diagram
Did anyone else get completely stumped on Task 5.1 in this lab? I'm not seeing a BGP diagram anywhere and could not decipher for the life of me what this question was asking. I tried everything I thought was logical, and looking at the solution whoa was I in the completely wrong area of what to do. So all in all, am I missing access to some diagrams, or how are others able to decipher that and complete the task? Thanks.
↧
↧
CCIE Collaboration Study Group
Hi Guys,
I am planning to take my CCIE Collaboration lab on March or April 2015. Any one interested to start a new group or if someone knows any existing group that I could join that would be great. Either way email me at Zubairbu@gmail.com and we will have this group started.
I am EST and would be eager to start this ASAP. One of the prerequisits is that you need to know some of the stuff in CUCM, CUC, IM and Prescese Server, Cisco Jabber, Media Resources, Voice Gateways and Signalling, Dial Plan Globalization and Localization, CME, CUE, UCCX and QoS.
I will be using INE Racks Rental and all of my phones to work with.
Hope to see some one soon.
Thank you,
Zubair
↧
few mistakes
Hi,
Few mistakes:
4.4 - OSPF
Advertise the Loopback0 of R10 into Area 0.0.10.2 - is this typo mistake or is this a requirement(then additional VL will be needed between R2 and R10)
5.1 IBGP
under R7 router bgp we need to specify cluster-id and set to 7.7.7.7
There is loop in the network similar to the one in Foundation Lab 2 for routes learnt from RIP and advertised to OSPF. This can cause issue with establishing bgp relationship between R1 and R9.
There is also problem that route for 128.10.99.9(loopback 99 of R9) will be advertsed to RIP(not only to BGP). If you loose bgp neighbor between R1 and R9 then route will be learn via rip and advertised to OSPF(causing loop).
↧
class-map type port-filter any vs. all
Hello,
Can anyone explain me the difference between match-all and match-any with relation to port-filter class-map? For example:
class-map type port-filter match-any CMAP1
match port tcp 80
match port tcp 443
vs.
class-map type port-filter match-all CMAP2
match port tcp 80
match port tcp 443
Thanks :)
↧
Practice Labs Workbook
Hi,
next week I start working with the full scale labs and I have some questions:
- I know I can do the lab as long as I need but there is any reasonable time I should be able to complete the lab? As we now the ccie lab is not only technical challenge but also time management. I would like to estimate my speed comparing with others, for example if I need 12h to complete the lab #1 and most of the people is able to do it in 8h I will know that my timeing is not good enough
- evaluation of the exams - how the evaluation is implemented here? Do I need to count all the points myself or there is any script which can do it for me?
thanks
Hubert
↧
↧
Task3.1
Hello Cristian,
I do not understand this setup.This is DMVPN with FVRF and IVRF coming from the same VRF.... No bridging. Therefore the tunnel should inlcude the ip vrf forwarding LAB4, right? Besides, EIGRP routing shouldnt be done within the VRF using address-family?
Kind regards,
Jose Antonio
↧
Typo in restriction in ticket 2?
Hello,
I'm just looking through the tasks in the full scale troubleshooting lab 3 and in ticket 2 it states:
Restrictions:
*Do modify the priority of any protocol to a value lower than the default.
Should that be "Do NOT modify" or is it really the intention to modify the priority? Seems weird to word a 'Do' as a restriction?
Thanks
↧
Ticket 6
Hey all, would like to dig your thoughts on this. Do you think MSDP is a valid solution for this ticket? I know that in the real exam, I should verify this with the proctor!
↧
OSPFv3 path selection issue
Hi all; I have this topology.
the network type on the ethernet segment between R1, R2 and R3 is "point-to-multipoint non-broadcast". so I setup neighborship on that segment with "neighbor" commands:
R1:
ipv6 address 2000:1:1:123::1/64
ospfv3 neighbor FE80::C803:AFF:FEA4:8 cost 20 ----> this is Link-local address of R3
ospfv3 neighbor FE80::C802:6FF:FE6C:8 cost 30 ----> this is Link-local address of R2
ospfv3 network point-to-multipoint non-broadcast
ospfv3 1 ipv6 area 1
---------------------------------
R2:
interface FastEthernet0/0
ipv6 address 2000:1:1:123::2/64
ospfv3 neighbor FE80::C801:BFF:FEE4:8 ----> this is Link-local address of R1
ospfv3 neighbor FE80::C803:AFF:FEA4:8
ospfv3 network point-to-multipoint non-broadcast
ospfv3 1 ipv6 area 1
---------------------------------
R3:
interface FastEthernet0/0
ipv6 address 2000:1:1:123::3/64
ospfv3 neighbor FE80::C802:6FF:FE6C:8
ospfv3 neighbor FE80::C801:BFF:FEE4:8
ospfv3 network point-to-multipoint non-broadcast
ospfv3 1 ipv6 area 1
---------------------------------
I have shutted down the R3 so there is just one path between R1 and 2000:1:1:45::/64 network for now. routing entry on R1 towards 2000:1:1:45::/64 network (ethernet segment between R4 and R5) is as follows:
R1(config-if)#do sh ipv6 route ospf
O 2000:1:1:45::/64 [110/75]
via FE80::C802:6FF:FE6C:8, FastEthernet0/0
the metric on R1 equals 75, while the metric on R2 is 65. regarding to the outputs the metric between R1 and R2 should equals 10, but I choose per-neighbor cost for R2 as 30!
R2(config-if)#do sh ipv6 route ospf
O 2000:1:1:45::/64 [110/65]
via FE80::C804:DFF:FE88:6, Serial1/0
at the second step, I enabled the R3, but disabled R2 and test the metric again:
R1(config-if)#do sh ipv6 route ospf
O 2000:1:1:45::/64 [110/22]
via FE80::C803:AFF:FEA4:8, FastEthernet0/0
the metric is 22 on R1 while the metric on R3 equals 2. Again, with regards to the outputs, the metric between R1 and R3 should be 20, that is what I have expected.
R3(config-if)#do sh ipv6 route ospf
O 2000:1:1:45::/64 [110/2]
via FE80::C805:CFF:FE80:8, FastEthernet0/1
As you see, the metric values are strange! any idea on how these values are calculated..?
and the second question; while both of R2 and R3 are enabled, R1 strangely chooses R2 as its next-hop toward 2000:1:1:45::/64 network with the metric of 13!
R1(config-if)#do sh ipv6 route ospf
O 2000:1:1:45::/64 [110/13]
via FE80::C802:6FF:FE6C:8, FastEthernet0/0
first of all, how this metric is calculated?!! besides, the routing table on R2 shows that R2 uses R3 and Fa0/0 as its next-hop. so a simple trace on R1 toward the mentioned network shows that the packet goes to R2 and R2 returnes it back to R3 through its Fa0/0. so why R1 chooses R2 as its next-hop while I setup per-neighbor cost and expect that R1 to choose R3 as its next-hop. And why doesn't R2 uses IPv6 ICMP redirect message to inform R1 to use another best next-hop if it knows it? you can easily setup the topology on GNS. it is good to mention that I'm using "C7200-ADVENTERPRISEK9-M), Version 15.2(4)S" image.
↧
↧
Route tracking on ASA
Hi,
I am trying to set up route tracking on ASA running 8.2 but the routing table will not take the tracking route. It should take the route through outside whenever the ip 17.17.6.6 is pingable, however in my case, it is allways taking the backup route.
Also, could you tell me the exact behaviour of :
timeout 900
frequency 1
My configuration:
route outside 140.1.7.0 255.255.255.0 17.17.14.1 1 track 1
route backup 140.1.7.0 255.255.255.0 17.17.15.1 254
sla monitor 1
type echo protocol ipIcmpEcho 17.17.6.6 interface outside
timeout 900
frequency 1
sla monitor schedule 1 life forever start-time now
ASA4#show route
S 140.1.7.0 255.255.255.0 [254/0] via 17.17.15.1, backup
O*E2 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 [110/1] via 17.17.14.6, 0:08:32, outside
ASA4(config)# ping 17.17.6.6
Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 17.17.6.6, timeout is 2 seconds:
!!!!!
Thanks
↧
2 Peer-KeepAlive statements
Hi ,
Any one has tried and tested 2 peer-Keepalive statements under Vpc domain command on 5ks. will it work ?
Vpc domain 10
peer keep-alive desx x.x.x.x {MGMT interface}
peer-Keepalive dest x.x.x.x vrf xx source x.x.x.x
Reason if Management interface link goes down , there wont be any redundancy in first place.
↧
Looking for Study Group in Northren VA/Washington DC area
I'm looking to start or join a study group in the Washington, DC area.
Thanks!
CCIEDOG
↧
Nexus 7000 ERSPAN - Known working config
Hi Guys,
I am trying to configure ERSPAN in place of the known RSPAN but I am having issues and cant seem to get my head round the Cisco document guide.
Anyone has a known working config on how to set ERSPAN up on the Nexus 7000?
I am trying to monitor from source vlan to a destination port please?
Thanks in advance
↧
↧
Limitation with UCE PE
HI all,
I am practicing CCIE using ICS-Platform Emulator 2.2.3a. Once I created service profile and associate with blade. I was prompted error saying “failed to find any operational uplink ….”. As this is simulator software and I do not have uplink switch to connect to. Is there a way to overcome this issue by forcing the LAN and SAN uplink port status UP? thanks
Regards,
R
↧
1050 Tokens for sale 400$ last price
Hello,
My Name is Roie Ben Haim and I pass my CCIE DC long ago but still have 1050 Tokens for sale.
My last price is 400$.
You can contact me roie9876@gmail.com
↧
EIGRP Unequal Cost Load Balancing (maths)
the SG has
interface GigabitEthernet1.67
delay 25
!
interface GigabitEthernet1.146
delay 131
!
router eigrp 100
variance 5This question's mathmatics baffles me. I have not done algebra since 1997.
I understand what needs to be done - but I do not underderstand the maths.
The solution guide goes from here (relavtive to this topic - dont worry about equal cost on R1)
The total delay of this path is 40 microseconds, or 4 tens of microseconds. Scaled by 256, R1 would be advertising 1024. Because R3's Feasible Distance of 1024 is equal to R6’s Feasible Distance, this path cannot be considered a Feasible Successor.
is this a typo?
to here:
Because the minimum configurable delay value is 10 microseconds, which is already the default for all Ethernet links, and based on task requirements, we need to modify R6's delay values on its VLAN 67 and VLAN 146 interfaces, so that metric through R1 is five times bigger than metric through R7.
then the formuale - which I do not know how to solve. - was the 250 arbitary?
5 * [Delay(Gi1.9) + Delay(Gi1.79) + Delay(Gi1.67)] = [Delay(Gi1.9) + Delay(Gi1.79) + Delay(Gi1.37) + Delay(Gi1.13) + Delay(Gi1.146)].
5 * [10 + 10 +Delay(Gi1.67)] = [10 + 10 + 10 + 10 + Delay(Gi1.146)]].I understand that the second line is a simplification of the first - but then how do you get the actual values for the delay on the interface? - It then suggests 250 - but I do not see the algebra workings:
If, for example, we configure delay on R6's VLAN 67 interface to be 250, in simple math we need to configure a delay value of 1310 on R6's VLAN 146 interface. This also means that configuring a variance of 5 will be enough so that both routes for VLAN 9 are installed in the routing table of R6 with the requested load distribution.
- was the 250 arbitary? - or does it have a direct correlation with the feasability condition - and if so how was it calculated? - I dont mean its obviously 25 x 10s of microseconds - I mean was this pulled out of a hat - could we have used. 500 and 2620 ?
250 + 20 = 270 * 5 which correlates to 1310 + 40 = 1350
But how was this worked out using maths to satisfy both the feasability condition and the 5 X load balancing ? guess work - or real algebra?
Thanks !
↧